get_dns_zone

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds only the field list; it says nothing about filtering behavior, pagination, or that name/type act as optional filters — the schema carries that. Little beyond annotations.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and closing with the practical next step. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return-value explanation is unneeded, and annotations cover the read-only profile. However, with three parameters that act as filters, the description omits how filtering works, leaving the agent to rely entirely on schema descriptions.

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% and each parameter is documented in the schema (name filter, type filter, domain pattern). The description adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond it, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a clear verb (List) and resource (DNS records of a domain), and enumerates returned fields. Distinguishes itself from add/update/delete_dns_record siblings by being the read operation, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

Gives a concrete usage path: read here, then use the returned ids to update or delete records. This implicitly positions it as the precursor to the mutation siblings, but does not state when to use this vs check_dns_propagation or filter conditions.

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