delete_dns_zone

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real value beyond them: it discloses that all records and metadata are cascaded away (not just the zone object) and that a specific permission scope (pdns/edit) is required. It stops short of stating irreversibility or confirmation behavior.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and its blast radius, followed by the risk flag and permission requirement in short fragments. Slightly telegraphic (three fragments rather than flowing prose) but nothing is wasted.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the important extras: cascade scope, permission requirement, and the underlying endpoint. Only the absence of any return/error expectation or reversibility note keeps it from a 5.

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 both 'zone' and 'confirm' are already documented in the schema, including the 'must be true' semantics of confirm. The description's 'by name' adds only marginal meaning over the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Delete) and resource (DNS zone) with scope clarified: 'along with all records and metadata'. The named API call (pdns/delete_zone) further pins it down, and it is clearly distinguishable from siblings like delete_dns_domain, delete_dns_subdomain, and delete_dns_record.

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 signals the risk profile ('DESTRUCTIVE') and the required permission ('Requires pdns/edit permission'), which implies caution, but it never says when to prefer this over sibling deletes (e.g. domain vs zone) or any preconditions such as zone must be empty. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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