Reapply DNS zone

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds concrete operational context: it can change public DNS answers, apply_state=queued does not mean publication completed, and dns:write is required. The non-idempotent annotation is consistent with the 'retry queued publication' behavior described.

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?

Six sentences, each carrying distinct information: precondition, prerequisite fix, async disclosure, polling guidance, refusal conditions, and auth scope. The purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return/async semantics, which it does by clarifying that apply_state=queued does not mean completion and that apply_error should be inspected on failure. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the schema already specifies zone_id as a published zone with apply_state=failed from get_dns_zone. The description reinforces this precondition and cross-references get_dns_zone, but adds no format or syntax detail 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 first sentence states a specific verb (retry publication), the resource (a published DNS zone), and the precise precondition (apply_state is failed). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like apply_dns_template, verify_dns_zone, and get_dns_zone.

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?

Explicitly directs the agent to call get_dns_zone first, fix apply_blocking_records before retrying, and poll get_dns_zone afterward until apply_state is clean or failed. It also names the conditions under which the API refuses the call (not published, not failed, still blocked).

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