delete_dns_zone

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's 'ДЕСТРУКТИВНО' is partly redundant. What it adds beyond the annotations is genuinely useful: the cascade behavior (all records and metadata are removed with the zone) and the exact authorization requirement (pdns/edit), neither of which is expressed in structured fields.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the risk flag, then the permission prerequisite. Every clause carries information; nothing is padding.

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 destructive tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers action, cascade scope, risk, and authorization. The only thing an agent might still want is whether the deletion is recoverable, but the destructive annotations plus the cascade statement make the call safe enough in practice.

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 the confirm parameter already carries its own instruction ('Must be true to run the operation'), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no syntax, format, or validation detail for 'zone', which is the correct baseline when the schema is fully documented.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('delete DNS zone by name') plus the blast radius ('along with all records and metadata'), and cites the underlying API operation (pdns/delete_zone). An agent can distinguish it from delete_dns_record and delete_dns_domain, which operate on narrower scopes.

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 flags the operation as destructive and names the required privilege (pdns/edit), which implicitly tells the agent when it is and isn't appropriate to call. However, it never names an alternative or explicitly contrasts deleting a whole zone versus deleting individual records, leaving that routing to inference from sibling names.

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