get_zone_tool

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool gets details, but does not clarify what happens if both parameters are provided (error? precedence?) or if neither is provided. It also doesn't mention any side effects, but as a GET-like tool it's likely read-only. The 'not both' hint is helpful but incomplete.

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, concise and front-loaded with the main action. No 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 simplicity of the toolhol (two optional params, output schema present), the description is adequate. It doesn't mention what happens if both or none are provided, but the phrase 'Provide either' implies one is needed. Overall complete enough.

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 already provides descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the crucial constraint of providing either one, not both. This adds value beyond the schema, especially since neither is required in the JSON 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?

Clearly states 'Get Cloudflare zone details by ID or name.' This is a specific verb+resource combination, and the mention of 'by ID or name' distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_zones_tool which retrieves multiple zones.

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 explicitly says to provide either zone_id or zone_name, not both, which gives clear usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over list_zones_tool or other alternatives, so it lacks exclusionary context.

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