Save DNS Records

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

Adds crucial behavioral detail: 'All existing records matching the same name AND type combination will be completely replaced — not merged.' This goes beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true) by specifying the exact condition for destruction. Also warns about the need for confirmation and prior listing.

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?

Concise; three sentences plus a warning. Front-loaded with the core action and critical warning. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with 2 parameters (domain and records array) and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: replacement rule, bulk vs single use case, and prerequisite actions. It is sufficient for an agent to use the tool 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?

The description highlights that the combination of 'name' and 'type' determines replacement behavior, which adds meaning beyond the input schema's individual field descriptions. However, it does not detail all parameters individually, but the schema itself provides good descriptions. With 50% schema coverage reported, the description partially compensates by explaining critical parameter interactions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Save (upsert) DNS records for a domain using PUT with force overwrite.' It identifies the verb (upsert), resource (DNS records), and method (PUT with force overwrite). It also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that for single records, type-specific tools should be used.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'for bulk operations with mixed record types.' Provides alternatives: 'For single records, prefer the type-specific tools (create_a_record, create_cname_record, etc.).' Also advises to confirm with user and check existing records with list_dns_records first.

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