dns_delete_cached

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the action is targeted (removes only the specified domain) and not a full flush, which adds valuable context. However, it does not mention potential side effects (e.g., whether the cache repopulates, error behavior for nonexistent domains) or authorization requirements. For a simple delete operation this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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 sentence that is both concise and information-dense. It states the core purpose and the key differentiator without any redundant words. The structure is front-loaded with the action.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly complete. It covers the operation and the distinction from flush. However, it could briefly mention what happens when the domain isn't cached or confirm that the action is immediate, which would improve completeness. Still, it's a well-specified tool relative to its complexity.

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 100% description coverage for the single 'domain' parameter, fully documenting its type and example. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action: 'Delete a specific domain from the DNS cache' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from a sibling tool by explicitly referencing 'flush' and noting that it only removes the specified domain, which differentiates it from dns_flush_cache.

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 implies when to use this tool by contrasting it with flush: use this for a single domain removal rather than clearing the entire cache. It clearly names the alternative (flush) and the distinguishing condition, though it doesn't provide explicit 'when not to use' beyond that.

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