add_dns_record

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

Beyond annotations, it discloses the authorization requirement and warns that `mname/rname` may be mandatory for SOA checks, which affects whether the call succeeds. It also implies upsert semantics via 'add or modify'.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and permissions, then conditional guidance. The phrasing 'в документации отмечены' is slightly indirect but not wasteful.

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 15 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the trickiest cases (SRV, SOA) but leaves `confirm`, `old_name`, and `increase_soa_serial` to the schema, which already explains them. An agent can call correctly if it reads the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents each parameter. The description adds group-level semantics: it names the SRV parameter set and explains that `mname/rname` are conditionally required.

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 states a clear verb ('add or change') and resource ('DNS record in zone'), and includes the internal endpoint `pdns/add_dns`. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like `delete_dns_record` or `add_dns_subdomain`, but the scope is unambiguous.

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?

It provides a prerequisite (`requires pdns/edit`) and record-type-specific guidance for SRV and SOA fields. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use vs alternatives or any exclusions, so an agent must infer tool selection from context.

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