dohdns_resolve

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the Google DNS-over-HTTPS protocol, which is a useful detail, but does not state that the operation is read-only, whether authentication is required, rate limits, error behavior, or return format—leaving significant gaps for a network-facing tool.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no wasted text.

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?

For a simple two-parameter, read-only DNS lookup tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It states what the tool does and its resolution method, but does not describe the return format or error behavior, which is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema itself documents both the domain name and the record type with a default value. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb (resolve), a specific resource (DNS records for a domain), and the underlying protocol (Google DNS-over-HTTPS). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling domain-related tools like rdap_domain (registration data) and domainsdb_search (domain search), so an agent can identify its purpose without opening the schema.

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 only says what the tool does; it provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. There is no mention of related tools such as rdap_domain for registration lookups, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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