create_dns_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the proxied behavior (traffic routing through Cloudflare's proxy), the ttl=1 automatic semantics, and record-type-specific constraints. It omits permission or duplicate-handling details, but covers the most impactful behavior for an agent deciding to call it.

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 compact, front-loaded paragraph that leads with the purpose and then clarifies each parameter in a logical order. No filler or repetition; every sentence earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter tool with zero schema coverage, the description covers all critical parameters and usage nuances. It does not discuss error conditions or authorization, but given the presence of an output schema and the detail provided, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to call correctly.

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 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It does so thoroughly: type enumerates examples, name explains '@' apex, content gives per-type meanings, ttl explains 1=automatic, proxied clarifies validity, and priority notes requirement. This adds substantial meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Create a DNS record in a zone.' It then enumerates the key fields and their roles, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and differentiating it from siblings like update_dns_record or 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?

The description clearly implies this is for creation and gives contextual constraints (e.g., proxied only valid for A/AAAA/CNAME, priority required for MX). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the verb and scope make the usage obvious.

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