list_zones

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

The description indicates a read-only operation by saying 'visible to this API token' and listing zones, which implies no side effects. It does not explicitly mention that it does not modify data, but the nature of a list operation makes this clear.

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 concise, using only two sentences to convey the main purpose, filter semantics, and environment scoping. No redundant or extraneous information is present.

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?

The description covers the essential information needed to call the tool: what it does, how filters work, and the automatic scoping. It does not mention pagination or output format, but the output schema is provided separately, so this is not a significant gap.

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?

Both parameters are explained with examples: name filters to an exact zone name, status filters by zone status (e.g., 'active', 'pending'). This provides clear meaning beyond the raw schema, which only defines them as optional strings.

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 tool lists zones (domains) visible to the API token, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_zone by implying this is for listing all zones, while get_zone is for a specific one.

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 explains the purpose of the optional filters (name and status) and mentions automatic scoping to CLOUDFLARE_ACCOUNT_ID. It does not explicitly contrast with get_zone or other siblings, but the listing vs. single-zone distinction is implied.

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