Xoá bản ghi DNS

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note about irreversibility, confirmation requirements, or what happens if the record does not exist, which is exactly the context a delete tool should supply.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the operative verb is front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably too terse for a destructive operation, so it stops short of a 5.

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 destructive, non-readOnly tool with no output schema and 0% schema description coverage, the description leaves key gaps: it omits the required domain_id, gives no failure behavior, and offers no success/failure semantics. An agent cannot invoke this fully confidently from the description alone.

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 0% and there are two required parameters. The description only echoes 'record_id' (already named in the schema) and never explains domain_id, its 24-hex format, or the relationship between the two identifiers.

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 states a specific verb+resource ('Xoá 1 bản ghi DNS') scoped by 'record_id', so the action is immediately clear. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the sibling DNS tools (cloud_domain_dns_list/add/update), and the required domain_id goes unmentioned.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus cloud_domain_dns_update (modify) or cloud_domain_dns_list (read), nor any precondition such as needing an existing record or the parent domain. The agent must infer routing purely from the tool name.

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