Delete DNS records

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description does not clarify the critical default behavior when no filters are provided. It says 'To filter which records to delete, add the name and type' but never states what happens if no filter is given—whether all records are deleted or no deletion occurs. This ambiguity is a major transparency gap for a destructive, idempotent operation.

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 reasonably concise with key points front-loaded: the action, the filtering mechanism, and the alternative. It avoids fluff but has some redundancy (e.g., 'Use this endpoint to remove specific DNS records from domains' restates the first line). Overall, it is structurally sound and 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?

The description covers the basic usage and provides an alternative for a specific scenario, but it misses essential context for a destructive tool: the default behavior without filters, whether deletion is permanent/reversible, and any confirmation requirements. The absence of an output schema increases the need for these details, making the description incomplete for safe and correct usage.

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?

The description explicitly mentions 'name' and 'type' filter parameters, but the input schema only defines 'domain'. This creates a mismatch: the agent sees a schema with one parameter yet the description implies additional parameters that are not defined in the schema. Though the description adds semantic meaning, it fails to align with the schema and leaves the agent uncertain about how to supply those filters.

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 action ('Delete DNS records') and the resource ('for the selected domain'), and distinguishes it from siblings by explaining it deletes specific records based on filters, with an explicit pointer to 'Update zone records' for partial deletions of duplicate records. The purpose is unambiguous and distinct.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this endpoint: to delete specific DNS records via filters, and gives a clear alternative (Update zone records) for a specific case where only some duplicates should be deleted. This directly addresses when-not-to-use and points to an alternative, satisfying the highest bar.

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