Change zone default TTL

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

The idempotentHint annotation already indicates the operation is idempotent. The description adds useful nuance that the change only affects RRSets without an explicit TTL, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as propagation delays, potential impact on existing records, or error conditions.

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 a single, concise sentence that states the core function and the critical scope qualifier. Every word earns its place, and the structure is clear and front-loaded.

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 simple zone update tool with only two well-documented parameters and an idempotentHint, the description is sufficient to understand the operation's scope. It doesn't explain return values, but the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the mutation make this acceptable.

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 fully describes both parameters (zone and ttl) with types, ranges, and examples, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds the concept of 'default TTL,' which clarifies the meaning of the ttl parameter, but the schema already carries the main semantic weight.

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: 'Change the default Time To Live (TTL) of a DNS zone.' It includes the specific resource (DNS zone) and the concept of 'default TTL,' and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like change_rrset_ttl by explicitly noting it applies to 'RRSets without an explicit TTL.'

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 gives implied usage context: it applies to the zone default, not individual RRsets, which helps the agent choose between this and change_rrset_ttl. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions beyond the TTL scope.

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