IT Tools MCP Server

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false (implying potential side effects), but the description doesn't elaborate on what those might be. The description adds context about using the 'dig command' which suggests command-line behavior, but doesn't disclose rate limits, authentication needs, or specific behavioral traits beyond what annotations minimally indicate.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that communicates the essential purpose without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and uses efficient language.

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 DNS lookup tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks information about return format, error conditions, or typical use cases. With annotations providing some behavioral hints but no output schema, more context would be helpful.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents both parameters ('target' and 'type'). The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about parameter usage, constraints, or examples beyond what's in the schema properties.

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 action ('Perform DNS lookup') and the method ('with dig command'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'nslookup' which serves a similar DNS function, but the mention of 'dig command' provides some implicit distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'nslookup' or other DNS-related tools. There's no mention of specific use cases, prerequisites, or limitations that would help an agent choose between this and similar tools.

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