Add static DNS record

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: dry_run defaults to TRUE, a real write persists to startup-config and is verified by re-reading the tree, and an existing name resolving elsewhere is refused rather than round-robined. This is exactly the mutation context an agent needs and is not duplicated by the annotation hints.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and the CLI form, then adds constraints. It is dense but every sentence earns its place; the split-horizon justification is the only mildly verbose element.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers persistence, dry-run default, verification, and failure mode. It could note the response shape or permission requirements, but what an agent needs to call it correctly is essentially present.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: the dry_run default and the round-robin rationale for why a conflicting name is rejected rather than extended. The CLI syntax mapping ('ip host <domain> <address>') further disambiguates domain and address roles.

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?

States a specific verb (create) and resource (static DNS record), plus the exact CLI form ('ip host <domain> <address>'). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling remove_dns_host and from set_dhcp_host, which covers a different record type.

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?

Explains the intended scenario (LAN half of a split-horizon setup) and gives a concrete prerequisite ('Remove the old record first'). It stops short of explicitly naming siblings like remove_dns_host as the routing alternative, but the when-to-use context is clear and actionable.

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