List DNS records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, and the description's "[READ]" marker merely restates that safety profile. It adds no behavior beyond the annotations: no pagination, result volume, ordering, or rate-limit context.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and the trailing official endpoint is directly useful for routing the call to the correct API. No filler.

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 single-parameter read tool whose annotations already cover the safety profile, the description is essentially complete; the only gap is that it never hints at the shape or volume of the returned record list, and there is no output schema to compensate.

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% for the single domain parameter, so the description carries the burden. "for a domain" confirms the parameter is the target domain but adds nothing about format, constraints, or that it is required, which the schema's pattern and required array already imply.

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 and resource ("List DNS records for a domain") and the [READ] tag separates it from the mutation siblings create_dns_record, update_dns_record, and delete_dns_record. However, it never names get_dns_record, the closest read sibling, so the boundary between listing and fetching a single record is left implicit.

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?

Usage is only implied by the name and the [READ] tag – an agent can infer to use this for enumeration rather than fetching one record. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (get_dns_record) guidance.

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