cloud_list_dns_zones

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

The description declares the tool as 'Read only, free', which alerts the agent to its non-destructive nature and lack of cost—useful since no annotations are provided. It also notes 'Compact by default', hinting at output format. However, it omits details about pagination, rate limits, or the exact structure of compact vs full payloads.

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 extremely concise: one sentence that front-loads the purpose. Every word earns its place, avoiding fluff. However, it may be too sparse, omitting some potentially useful context like the exact scope (e.g., all zones or user's zones).

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?

Given the lack of an output schema and the presence of nested objects in the input (query parameter), the description does not adequately explain the return value format or how to handle the query parameter. For a list tool, details like pagination or result limits are missing, making it incomplete for reliable agent decision-making.

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 input schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter described. The description adds minimal parameter semantics—only implying that compact output is default (opposite of verbose). This meets the baseline for high schema coverage, but the concise description does not enhance parameter understanding beyond what's already in the 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 clearly states 'List DNS zones', specifying both the action and resource. It also identifies the tool as part of the 'Cloud API', which distinguishes it from robot_* siblings but not from other cloud_list_* tools that list different resources.

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 mentions the tool is 'Read only, free' and 'Compact by default', providing some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., other list tools for different resources), nor does it give any when-not-to-use guidance.

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