Create CAA Record

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint, etc.) by explicitly stating that existing records are replaced, not merged. It also discloses the potential impact on SSL/TLS issuance, which is critical for agent decision-making.

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 concise (4 sentences) with no unnecessary words. Each sentence serves a purpose: definition, purpose, behavioral warning, and usage advice. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 the destructive nature of the tool and the lack of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, its behavioral implication (overwrite), potential risks, and a pre-check recommendation. This is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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 all 6 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning, though it does clarify the 'name' parameter usage with '@' for root. This does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Create a CAA record') and the resource ('domain'), and distinguishes it from sibling DNS record tools by specifying the record type and its purpose (Certificate Authority Authorization).

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 explicit guidance: it warns that the tool overwrites all existing CAA records with the same name, not merging them, and advises using list_dns_records first. It also cautions about the risk of preventing certificate issuance, giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use context.

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