infomaniak_dns_list_records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining the tool returns all records on the zone and that the input must be a root domain, not a subdomain. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences with no filler. The key action and example are front-loaded, and each sentence earns its place by defining scope and clarifying the required input format.

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 listing tool with a robust output schema and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description adequately covers the essential context. It states what the tool lists, the required input type, and the constraint against subdomains, leaving no significant gap for an agent to misuse it.

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% and already describes the zone parameter as 'Zone (root domain), e.g. example.com'. The description reinforces the root-domain requirement but does not add substantive new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 description clearly states the tool lists every DNS record on an Infomaniak-managed zone, using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('DNS record on a zone'). It distinguishes the tool from DNS mutation siblings like infomaniak_dns_create_record and infomaniak_dns_update_record by focusing on enumeration, and gives a concrete example.

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 clear usage context by instructing the agent to use the root domain and explicitly warns against using a subdomain. It does not name alternative tools for exclusions, but the second sentence provides actionable guidance on how to invoke the tool correctly.

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