get_dns_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden; 'Show' implies a non-destructive read and the field list signals the response shape, which is useful. However, it does not mention whether a device_id must be reachable, what happens on an unreachable device, or any permission requirement.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the resource first and the returned fields in parentheses. No filler, no redundant restatement of the name.

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 read-only getter with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient because it enumerates the returned configuration items. It would be complete with a note on the required device context and any failure behavior.

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%, with both device_id and vdom documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning (e.g., whether vdom defaults to the device's global context) beyond what the schema already supplies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('system DNS configuration') and enumerates the fields returned (primary/secondary servers, domain, DoT/DoH), so an agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby config getters like get_ntp_settings, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus alternatives, nor any prerequisite or exclusion guidance. The read-only nature is only implied by the verb 'Show', leaving the agent to infer usage context entirely.

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