hcloud_get_zone_rrsets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. On top of that the description adds the primary-mode restriction and the specific 422/incorrect_zone_mode failure mode, which is genuine extra context. It stays vague about the exact pagination/sorting semantics, deferring to 'Use the provided URI parameters'.

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 lead sentence is well front-loaded, but the body is padded with markdown anchor links (#tag/zone-rrsets, #tag/zones) that add no information for an agent. The error table is only one row and arguably earns its place, but 'Use the provided URI parameters to modify the result' is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it only says it returns 'all RRSets in the Zone' without describing the RRSet shape (records, ttl, labels, protection) or how pagination metadata is returned. Combined with the missing tie-break against hcloud_get_zone_rrset, it is adequate but not complete.

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%, so every parameter (name, page, per_page, sort, type, label_selector, id_or_name) is already documented in the schema with enums, defaults and bounds. The description adds nothing beyond 'Use the provided URI parameters to modify the result', so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List RRSets / Returns all RRSets in the Zone'), scoped to a single zone, which cleanly separates it from the singular hcloud_get_zone_rrset. It never names the sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the list-vs-single split from the plural name alone.

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?

'Only applicable for Zones in primary mode' gives a real precondition, reinforced by the 422 incorrect_zone_mode error row, so the agent knows when the call will fail. It stops short of routing the agent to alternatives such as hcloud_get_zone_rrset for a single RRSet or hcloud_post_zone_rrsets for creation.

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