Save a DNS zone

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

The description contradicts the annotation destructiveHint=false by stating 'Every record, URL forward and mail forward absent from body is deleted.' This is a destructive side effect that the annotation denies, so the description conflicts with the provided metadata.

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 a dense yet efficient paragraph. It front-loads the primary purpose, then each subsequent sentence adds crucial guidance (deletion behavior, alternative tool, validation workflow, rdata convention) without redundancy.

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 complex nested body schema, the description supplies all necessary context: how to obtain the complete zone (get_zone), what happens to omitted records, when to use upsert_record instead, the benefit of running check_zone first, and the rdata field convention. The output schema is also present.

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 body parameter description adds critical meaning beyond the schema: 'The complete zone as returned by eurodns_dns_get_zone, with your changes applied: records, urlForwards and mailForwards. Anything left out is deleted; record values go in rdata.' This clarifies the expected payload and deletion semantics. The domainName description provides a concrete example.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Replaces the entire zone of domainName with body and returns the saved zone.' It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing eurodns_dns_upsert_record and eurodns_dns_get_zone, making the tool's role clear.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'to change one record use eurodns_dns_upsert_record instead, which validates and keeps the rest' and 'Run eurodns_dns_check_zone first: a rejected save answers a generic 400, while the check names the offending record.' This clearly contrasts with related tools.

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