Create TXT Record

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

The description clearly discloses the destructive behavior (replaces all existing TXT records with same name, not merged) and warns about impacts on email authentication. This complements the annotations (destructiveHint: true) and provides actionable 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?

The description is concise with two clear sentences plus a critical warning. All information is relevant and front-loaded, with no unnecessary detail.

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?

The description covers purpose, behavior, and prerequisites. Though it lacks output format info (no output schema), the warnings and context make it sufficiently complete for a create tool with well-documented parameters.

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 parameters. The description adds some context (e.g., value examples like SPF strings), but does not significantly enhance what the schema already provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the tool creates TXT records for a domain and lists common use cases (SPF, DKIM, DMARC, verification). It distinguishes itself from sibling record creation tools by its specific focus on TXT records.

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 usage warnings about overwriting existing TXT records and recommends using list_dns_records first. It implicitly guides when to use by listing applicable scenarios, but does not explicitly contrast with other create_*_record siblings.

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