Add records to an RRSet

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the additive nature ('Existing records are kept') and the auto-create side effect ('Creates the RRSet if it does not exist yet'). This is valuable behavioral context, though it omits details like duplicate handling or failure modes.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word contributes meaning with no redundancy.

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 mutation tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: adding, preserving existing records, and creating if absent. It does not describe return values or error conditions, but those are not explicitly required by the rubric given the tool's simplicity.

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 80%, and the schema already explains each parameter's meaning. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level insight, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states the action: 'Add records to an RRSet.' It further specifies key behaviors: 'Existing records are kept' and 'Creates the RRSet if it does not exist yet,' which differentiates it from sibling tools like set_records (replace) and remove_records (delete).

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 when to use the tool: when you need to add records without disturbing existing ones, and when the RRSet may need to be created. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is clear enough given the sibling tools.

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