add_dns_zone

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation, and the description aligns with that. It adds valuable context by explicitly stating the required permission ('Требует права pdns/edit') and identifying the authoritative PowerDNS backend. It does not discuss idempotency or duplicate-zone behavior, but the annotations carry much of the safety profile.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no wasted words. It conveys the core action, target system, endpoint, and permission requirement efficiently.

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?

Although the schema richly documents all 8 parameters, the description does not mention what happens after a successful creation, whether any confirmation/return value is produced, or how to choose this over related DNS tools. For a creation operation with no output schema, this is adequate but leaves some operational context to inference.

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%, so the schema already documents every parameter, including defaults for kind, dnssec, rrsets, and nameservers. The description contributes no additional parameter-level meaning, and no compensation is needed given the high schema coverage.

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 ('Создать DNS-зону') and the specific resource ('авторитетном сервере PowerDNS'), also referencing the underlying endpoint 'pdns/add_zone'. It is unambiguous about what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from closely related siblings like add_dns_domain or add_dns_subdomain.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions required permissions but never states conditions, exclusions, or points to related DNS tools such as add_dns_domain, add_dns_subdomain, or delete_dns_zone. Usage context is only implied by the tool name.

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