get_secondary_dns_tsig

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get details' clearly signals a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose response format, possible errors, or authorization requirements. It is minimally adequate but lacks richer 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 focused sentence with no filler or redundant wording. Every word contributes to identifying the action and resource, and it is front-loaded with the verb.

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 get-by-ID tool with two fully described parameters, the description is mostly sufficient. However, there is no output schema and the description does not indicate what 'details' will be returned, nor does it cover edge cases like not-found behavior. It is adequate but leaves room for improvement.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both tsig_id and account_id, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already states, which matches the baseline of 3.

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 states a specific action ('Get details') and a specific resource ('secondary DNS TSIG key'). The word 'specific' differentiates this from the sibling list_secondary_dns_tsigs, so an agent can immediately tell the two apart.

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 phrasing 'details of a specific ... key' clearly implies this tool is for fetching a single TSIG key identified by ID, rather than listing all keys. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the usage context is clear enough for this simple get-by-ID operation.

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