Delete DNS record

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context beyond them: the required dns:write scope for API-key auth and the fact that deletion targets declarative desired state. It does not state irreversibility or synchronous-vs-async behavior, so it falls short of a 5.

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 short sentences, no filler, with the core action front-loaded and the auth constraint second. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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 only two well-documented parameters and annotations covering the destructive profile, the definition is close to adequate. However, for a destructive operation with no output schema, it omits whether the record is removed immediately or queued, whether a missing record errors, and how success is reported, leaving real gaps.

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%, with zone_id and record_id both documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantics such as identifier formats, lookup behavior, or whether zone_id is derivable.

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 and resource ('Delete a forward DNS record') plus a qualifier ('from desired state'), which is clearly distinguishable from write-oriented siblings like upsert_dns_record and update_dns_record. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with those siblings, so it isn't a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the delete verb; the description never says when to remove a record versus upserting or updating one, nor what happens if the record is already absent. The 'Requires dns:write when using an API key' line gives a partial prerequisite, which lifts it above pure absence of guidance.

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