dns_lookup

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

No annotations exist, so description must detail behavior. It describes what is looked up but omits behavioral aspects like read-only nature, rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two paragraphs, first sentence hits main purpose, parameter described with bullet. No wasted words, but could be slightly more structured.

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 the simple nature of the tool and presence of an output schema, the description fully covers the input and expected output (DNS records and SSL info). No gaps remain.

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 single parameter 'domain' has 0% schema coverage, but the description adds an example format ('example.com') and clarifies it's a domain name, adding value beyond the bare schema.

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?

Explicitly states it looks up DNS records (A, AAAA, MX, NS, TXT, CNAME) and SSL info. Distinguishes from siblings like dns_whois_lookup and check_ssl_certificate by combining both DNS and SSL in one tool.

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?

Provides clear use cases: domain research, troubleshooting, infrastructure verification. However, does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives for specific tasks (e.g., reverse DNS).

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