opn_list_dns_forwards

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description discloses the return format (dict with 'rows' and 'rowCount'), indicating it's a read operation. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, permissions, or limitations. This is adequate for a simple listing tool but lacks depth.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of three sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence adds value: function, use case, and return structure. No unnecessary words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (list with two optional parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main aspects: what it lists, when to use, and what it returns. The missing parameter explanations are a minor gap in an otherwise complete description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has two parameters (search, limit) with 0% description coverage in the schema. The description provides no explanation of these parameters, leaving the agent to infer their meaning from the schema types and defaults. This is a significant gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists 'Unbound DNS forward zones' and defines them as 'domain-specific DNS servers'. It uses specific verb ('List') and resource ('DNS forward zones'), distinguishing it from sibling list tools like opn_list_dns_overrides or opn_dns_lookup.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly says 'Use this when you need to check which domains are forwarded to specific upstream DNS servers or DNS-over-TLS resolvers'. This provides clear context for when to use, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.