dns_list

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

The annotation readOnlyHint already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description's 'List' is consistent but adds no extra behavioral context such as pagination, response limits, or what 'all' includes. No value beyond the annotation is provided.

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, concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It clearly states the action and object, making it efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool has a simple one-parameter schema, a read-only annotation, and an output schema that presumably covers return structure. The description sufficiently conveys the core function, though it lacks any caveats about large datasets or filtering behavior. Slightly more context could help, but overall it is adequate for this simple operation.

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 single parameter 'domain' has a complete schema description ('Domain name (e.g., 'example.com')'), achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('DNS records') and scope ('for a domain'). It distinguishes from siblings like dns_get or dns_get_by_name_type by explicitly stating 'all' records, implying a broad listing operation.

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 implies usage for retrieving all DNS records for a domain, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of dns_get or dns_get_by_name_type, nor does it provide any exclusion criteria. The usage context is implied but not stated.

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