get_secondary_dns_outgoing

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 conveys that this is a read operation via 'Get', but adds no detail about required zone type, error behavior, authentication needs, or whether any state is affected. The description essentially restates the tool name without adding behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant explanation. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter getter and every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple: one required parameter with full schema coverage and no nested objects, so basic invocation is possible. However, there is no output schema and the description never explains what the returned configuration contains or how it relates to other secondary DNS tools, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter zone_id, including a plain description and maxLength, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description itself does not reference the parameter, but this is acceptable given full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a precise resource ('secondary DNS outgoing zone transfer configuration'), making the operation and target unambiguous. The 'outgoing' qualifier also distinguishes it from closely related sibling tools like get_secondary_dns_incoming and get_secondary_dns_primary without requiring 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of conditions under which this configuration would apply. The sibling list contains several other secondary DNS tools, but the description does not help an agent choose among them.

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