Import zone file

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses a critical behavior: 'This REPLACES the current records of the zone.' It also mentions the confirm=true safety requirement and suggests a backup, all adding significant behavioral context beyond what annotations alone provide.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then a warning, then actionable advice. Every sentence adds value and there is no filler or repetition.

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 import operation with no output schema, the description covers the core action, the replacement behavior, the confirmation requirement, and a backup suggestion. The schema covers parameters, making this adequately complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and each parameter already has meaningful descriptions (zone, confirm, zonefile). The description adds 'REPLACES' context that informs the zonefile semantics, but it primarily reinforces what the schema already states, so a baseline 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?

Clearly states the action ('Import'), the target resource ('zone file into an existing primary zone'), and the input format ('BIND format'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like export_zonefile by describing an import operation that replaces existing records, which is a distinct purpose.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: requires confirm=true, and recommends using export_zonefile first as a backup. This gives clear context on when to use the tool and a practical alternative, meeting the 'explicit when/when-not/alternatives' criterion.

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