infomaniak_dns_delete_record

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds crucial behavioral detail about the two-phase commit, including the plan preview and token mechanism. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then process, then token clarification. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Highly efficient.

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 an output schema exists, return values need not be detailed. The description covers the two-phase process, parameter specifics, and token usage. It could mention idempotency of the delete phase, but the annotation idempotentHint=true partially covers that. Overall complete for its purpose.

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 three parameters. The description adds meaning: zone must be a domain with DNS managed by Infomaniak; record_id is numeric from list_records; confirmation_token comes from the plan phase and includes a preview. This enriches 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 states 'Delete a DNS record from an Infomaniak-managed zone' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like infomaniak_dns_create_record and infomaniak_dns_update_record by focusing on deletion and the unique two-phase commit process.

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 explicitly explains the two-phase commit: first call returns a plan and token, second call executes the deletion. It advises verifying the plan preview before confirming, which provides clear usage context. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use statement but is still well-guided.

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