list_dns

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does reveal that the tool lists records (a read operation) and that only 'allowlisted' records are included, which is a meaningful scoping detail. However, it omits information about pagination, result format, or what 'allowlisted' specifically entails, leaving some behavior unknown.

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 single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then mentions the optional filters with no wasted words. Every word contributes useful information, making this a model of concise writing.

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 list operation with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential requirements: what it lists and the available filters. It could mention pagination or return format, but these are minor omissions given the low complexity and the clarity already provided.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by identifying 'name' and 'type' as optional filters, giving them a purpose beyond the bare schema. It does not specify allowed values, matching behavior, or format details, but for two simple parameters this partial explanation is adequate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('allowlisted Cloudflare DNS records'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It also notes optional filtering by type or name. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_dns, leaving the distinction between listing and retrieving to be inferred.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving a list of DNS records rather than a single record or performing mutations, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over get_dns or the other siblings. No exclusions or alternative conditions are stated, so the usage context is only implied.

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