combell_dns_records_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not restate safety. It adds behavioral context about filter dependencies and implies a read-only list operation. It does not contradict annotations and provides useful additional constraint information.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The core purpose is stated first, followed by the essential filter constraint. Every word adds value and the description is front-loaded.

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 list operation with pagination parameters (skip/take) already documented in the schema, the description covers the main functionality and filter constraints. It does not describe the return format, but no output schema exists and it's an implied list of DNS records. The tool is adequately specified for correct 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 are already documented. The description adds extra meaning by clarifying that record_name and service are only effective when a type filter is present, which is not explicitly stated in the schema. This enhances parameter understanding beyond the schema.

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 verb and resource ('List the DNS records of a domain') and enumerates the filter types. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling get tool via the word 'list', but does not explicitly mention that get retrieves a single record. This is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 provides a specific usage constraint: 'record_name and service filters only apply together with a type filter.' However, it does not mention when to use this tool versus the sibling combell_dns_records_get, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. The guidance is limited to a single filter dependency.

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