remove_static_dns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses the write guard, preview/confirm semantics, error behavior for zero matches, and AmbiguousResourceError for multiple matches without guessing.

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-loads the core verb, resource, command path, and identifier narrowing in the first sentence. Remaining sentences add valuable guard and error context, with only minor repetition of the name/record_type narrowing.

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?

Rich behavioral detail compensates for absent annotations, and the output schema reduces the need to describe return values. The omission of any device_name semantics is the main remaining gap for a required parameter.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains name, record_type, and confirm well, but completely omits device_name, which is a required parameter. This leaves a significant gap for a 4-parameter tool.

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 (Remove), resource (static DNS entry), and exact RouterOS command path. Identifies the entry by name, optionally narrowed by record_type, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling add_static_dns.

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 guarded write flow: blocked unless MIKROTIK_ALLOW_WRITE=true, call with confirm=False for preview, then confirm=True to remove. No alternative sibling tool is named, so it stops short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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