dns_update_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the tool's name. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive, requires specific permissions, or what happens if the record does not exist. The description adds zero value beyond the tool's name.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action, but it is so brief that it misses opportunities to include high-value context without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite having 7 parameters and 5 required, the description provides no overview of how parameters interact (e.g., the relationship between 'value' and 'newValue', or that 'newDomain' renames a record). With no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate for an agent to understand the full scope of the update operation.

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%, so every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameters, maintaining the baseline of 3 as per the rubric.

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 'Update an existing DNS record' clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like dns_add_record and dns_delete_record. However, it lacks any scope detail such as which fields are updatable, so it does not fully differentiate from all possible update-like tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dns_add_record or dns_delete_record. There is also no mention of dns_check_update for validation or any prerequisites, leaving the agent without contextual direction.

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