hcloud_delete_zone_rrset

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: the primary-mode-only restriction and the specific 422 error code the agent should expect. It does not explain that the delete is permanent/irreversible in prose or what a successful response/action looks like, which keeps it from a 5.

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 core action and the scope restriction are front-loaded in the first two sentences, with the error table serving a clear purpose. The markdown anchor links (#tag/zone-rrsets, #tag/zones) add minor noise for an agent consumer but do not impede comprehension.

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 4-parameter destructive zone operation with no output schema, the description supplies the essential gate (primary mode) and the failure signature. Missing pieces are minor: whether deletion is idempotent when the RRSet is absent, and what the 'wait' flag does on a delete (action polling vs. immediate return).

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%, including detailed rules for rr_name (lowercase, Punycode, '@' for apex) and an enum for rr_type, so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, notably silent on the 'wait' parameter's polling behavior, which is the one field whose semantics are not fully spelled out.

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 specific verb and resource ('Delete an RRSet') and immediately scopes it ('from the Zone'). It is clearly distinguishable from hcloud_update_zone_rrset, hcloud_post_zone_rrsets, and the record-manipulation siblings (add/remove/set records), which modify contents rather than remove the RRSet itself.

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 line 'Only applicable for Zones in primary mode' is an explicit precondition that rules out secondary-mode zones, reinforced by the 422 incorrect_zone_mode error row. It does not name an alternative tool (e.g., for secondary zones), so it stops short of full when-to-use routing, but the exclusion criteria are clear.

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