list_sinkholes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers only account scoping. It does not disclose whether results are paginated, how many sinkholes can be returned, required auth/permissions, or any rate limit — all relevant for a list endpoint.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though so terse that it omits anything beyond the core purpose.

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 simple one-parameter list tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations the description should say something about the returned collection or pagination. As written, the agent knows what it lists but not what it gets back.

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 100% for the single account_id parameter, so the schema already documents it fully; baseline 3 applies. The phrase "owned by a Cloudflare account" merely reinforces the scope already implied by account_id.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("List the DNS sinkholes") with a stated scope ("owned by a Cloudflare account"), which is clearer than a bare restatement of the name. It does not, however, distinguish this from siblings like get_sinkhole (single) or list_sinkhole_ingresses (child resource).

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus get_sinkhole or list_sinkhole_ingresses, and no mention of prerequisites or pagination behavior. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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