dns_whois_lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions that records are returned 'when available', which adds some context. However, it does not disclose error handling (e.g., non-existent domain) or any side effects. Given the read-only nature, the transparency is adequate but not thorough.

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 very concise, with three sentences covering purpose, usage, and return types, followed by parameter details. No wasted words, and the essential information is front-loaded.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. It explains what it does, when to use it, what records are returned, and the parameter. However, it could mention error handling or differentiation from 'dns_lookup' for full completeness.

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 one parameter 'domain' with 0% description coverage. The description adds a usage example and clarifies it is a domain name. This adds value beyond the schema but does not provide constraints or validation details. Baseline is 3 due to low 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 clearly states that the tool looks up DNS records for a domain and lists specific record types (A, AAAA, MX, NS, TXT, CNAME). It is distinct from many siblings but does not explicitly differentiate from 'dns_lookup', which may be similar.

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 advises when to use the tool ('Use this to find what DNS records a domain has'), but does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives among sibling tools like 'dns_lookup'.

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