Delete DNS record

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: a confirmation prompt when the client supports it, and the exact outcome semantics when the user declines ('declined'/'cancelled', nothing deleted). It stops short of covering failure modes such as a missing or already-deleted record.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then the confirmation behavior. The parenthetical '(or cancelled)' is slightly noisy but does convey a real variant status, so no sentence is wasted.

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?

With a complete output schema and 100% parameter coverage, the description only needs to explain the destructive confirmation flow, which it does, including the declined/cancelled outcome. Minor gap: no mention of what happens on invalid ids or whether dependent records are affected.

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 all three parameters (zone, type, id with a full enum list) are already fully documented in the schema. The description reiterates that id comes from list_dns_records, which is already stated in the id's schema description, and adds no further meaning for zone or type. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete a DNS record') and names the lookup tool that supplies the id, so it is distinguishable from create_dns_record and update_dns_record. It does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite: the id must come from list_dns_records, which tells an agent to look the record up first. It does not name explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but for a destructive delete the usage context is adequately conveyed.

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