dns_get_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'Retrieves' details, implying a read operation, but doesn't mention potential errors (e.g., if record doesn't exist), authentication requirements, or other behavioral nuances. It's minimal.

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 concise and front-loads the core purpose. The Args and Returns sections are minimal, but there is no excessive verbosity. It earns a high score for being lean, though it might benefit from a bit more context.

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 that an output schema exists, the return format is covered. However, the tool is a simple get-by-ID operation, but with no annotations and sparse description, the description lacks details on error handling, permissions, or usage context. It is barely sufficient for a straightforward tool but lacks depth.

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 0%, and the description only repeats the parameter names without adding any semantics like format or constraints. It does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving the agent with no additional insight into what 'domain' or 'record_id' should look like.

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 verb 'Get details' and the resource 'DNS record', specifying that it retrieves details for a specific record. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like dns_get_domain or dns_list_records, though the intent is clear from the name and context.

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 it (when you have a domain and record ID to fetch details), but it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like dns_list_records (to list all records) or dns_validate_record. Sibling names offer hints but no explicit guidance is provided.

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