dig

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

With readOnlyHint=false, the annotation suggests possible side effects, but dig is typically read-only. The description adds no behavioral traits such as output format, timeout behavior, or permissions, beyond what the schema provides.

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 a single sentence, concise and to the point with no redundant information. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though slightly more structure could be beneficial.

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 no output schema, the description could explain the return format (e.g., raw dig output). It is adequate for a basic tool but lacks completeness in explaining what the agent can expect.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Perform DNS lookup with dig command' clearly states the tool's action and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like nslookup, which performs a similar function.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as nslookup or ping. The description lacks context for when to prefer dig.

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