List DNS templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the API-key permission requirement (dns:read) and that templates are backend-defined rather than user-authored.

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 core action and followed by a permission note; no filler. The template enumeration is slightly long but earns its place by helping an agent judge relevance. Structure is efficient.

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 single-parameter read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it says what is listed, the qualifying zone type, and the auth requirement. Return format or pagination behavior is not addressed, but that gap is minor here.

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% for the single zone_id parameter, so the schema carries the parameter burden and the baseline is 3. The description's only added semantic is that the zone must be a 'native forward zone', which the schema does not convey, but nothing about syntax or constraints is added.

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 ('List backend-defined DNS record templates') and scopes it to 'a native forward zone', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_dns_zones, get_dns_zone, and apply_dns_template. The enumerated template families (web service, Google Workspace, M365, Null MX, CAA lockdown) further pin down what is returned.

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?

Implies applicability via 'for a native forward zone' and gives a prerequisite ('Requires dns:read when using an API key'), but never states when to choose this over the closely related apply_dns_template or how it relates to retrieving a zone's existing records. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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