dnssec_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool checks DNSSEC and validates the chain, but doesn't explain what happens if DNSSEC is missing, whether it makes external queries, or any rate-limiting or permission considerations.

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 short (two lines plus parameter list) and front-loaded with the purpose. It could be more structured, but it is efficient with no wasted words.

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 has 1 parameter and an output schema (not shown), the description adequately states the core function. However, it lacks behavioral details about error handling or performance, leaving the agent with minimal context for complex scenarios.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds 'Domain — Domain name to check (e.g. 'example.com').' This provides an example but little additional meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

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 tool checks DNSSEC enablement and validates the chain. This is a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('domain DNSSEC') that distinguishes it from siblings like dns_lookup or dns_whois_lookup.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like dns_lookup or reverse_dns_lookup. Usage is implied by the name and description but not clarified.

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