list_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List all' conveys that the default returns every record and filters narrow it, which is helpful, but it says nothing about permissions, pagination, or result ordering for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the verb, resource, scope, and optional filters. Every clause earns its place with zero 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?

For a simple three-parameter read tool this is adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the description does not disclose the shape of returned records or pagination, leaving an agent to infer return behavior.

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%, so the schema already documents domainName, name, and type in detail. The description restates the type and hostname filters but adds no format or syntax beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for full coverage.

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 specific verb ('List') and resource ('DNS records') scoped to a domain, with the filterable fields named. It is clearly distinguishable from mutation siblings like add_record or delete_record, though it offers no explicit contrast against the read-only list_domains sibling.

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 phrase 'with optional filtering' tells the agent the filters are non-mandatory, which is useful context, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over list_domains or get_dnssec, and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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