Replace DNS records

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description confirms overwriting. It adds value by clarifying that ALL matching records are replaced and by highlighting the dry_run=true preview option, providing context beyond the 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and overwrite warning, then the use case and dry_run note. Every word earns its place with zero fluff.

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?

Given the 7-parameter schema and absence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, destructive nature, use case, and preview option. It could mention response/error behavior, but annotations and schema fill most gaps, making it sufficiently complete for safe invocation.

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 parameters already have clear meanings. The description adds no significant parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides; it only mentions type+name and dry_run, which are already covered.

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 clearly states the tool replaces ALL DNS records of a given type+name, using the PUT method. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from siblings like add_dns_record or delete_dns_record.

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 explicitly says 'Use it when exactly one record should exist and duplicates must be removed,' giving a clear when-to-use condition. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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