list_dns_secondary_zones

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

The operation is read-only and the readOnlyHint annotation already covers that safety profile. The description adds no new behavioral details such as pagination, result shape, or scoping beyond what the annotation and name imply. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler or redundant content. It front-loads the action and resource immediately and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 parameterless, read-only list operation with a readOnlyHint annotation, this description is sufficiently complete. An agent knows what the tool does and can select it correctly from the sibling tools without additional guidance.

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 tool accepts zero parameters and the schema has full coverage of that fact. With no parameters, there is nothing for the description to explain beyond confirming it is a listing operation, which it does.

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 specific verb and resource: 'List all secondary DNS zones'. It also scopes to the user's IONOS CLOUD account. The word 'secondary' distinguishes this from the sibling tool list_dns_zones without needing to inspect schemas.

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 clearly implies this tool is for enumerating secondary DNS zones, and the 'all' wording implies collection vs single-item retrieval like get_dns_secondary_zone. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_dns_zones or list_dns_secondary_zone_records.

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