List Dns Records

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination behavior — a critical concern for a list operation — nor what the default result set is when no filters are applied. It only implies a read operation, leaving the agent to guess at list semantics.

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 8-word sentence has zero waste and is perfectly front-loaded. It is slightly under-specified, but that is a completeness issue rather than a conciseness defect; the descriptor itself is efficiently written.

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 covers the return shape, but for a list operation with three parameters and no annotations, the description fails to explain pagination, default filtering behavior, or when listing differs from fetching a single record. An agent cannot fully predict the tool's behavior from this definition alone.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (zone_id, name, record_type) with type details and an example for name. The description adds nothing about the filter parameters beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and a specific resource ('DNS records') scoped to a zone. It is clearly distinct from singular operations like get_dns_record and from get_zone_settings, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings, so it misses the top score.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus the related get_dns_record (single record) or update_dns_record siblings. There are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or use-case scenarios — an agent must infer when listing is appropriate.

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