setup_dmarc

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states 'Add DMARC policy TXT record,' omitting crucial details like whether it creates or updates an existing record, propagation delays, authentication needs, or the fact that it modifies DNS. The mutability and side effects are not clarified.

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 (5 words) that gets straight to the point. It is not overly verbose, though it could benefit from additional structured details like a bullet list of parameters or usage note. No fluff is present.

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 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain that it creates a DNS TXT record, nor does it cover policy defaults or the optional report email. The tool's role in the DNS setup process is not contextualized, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema). The description itself adds no parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides. Thus it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 'Add DMARC policy TXT record' clearly states the verb (Add) and specific resource (DMARC policy TXT record). It distinguishes from siblings like setup_spf and setup_dkim, which handle different record types, and from generic create_dns_record.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., domain ownership, DNS zone requirement) and does not mention that the domain must be registered or that a DNS provider is needed. No comparison with sibling tools is given.

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