dns_export_zone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return format ('text') and the output type ('zone file'), but it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or whether any side effects occur. Although 'export' implies non-destructive, explicit disclosure would be stronger.

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 action and resource, and contains no filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and return value adequately. However, it lacks explicit side-effect disclosure and usage guidance, leaving a small gap but not a major one 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 coverage is 100% with a clear description for the 'zone' parameter ('Zone domain name to export'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it falls at the baseline.

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 ('Export') and the specific resource ('DNS zone file') with format ('standard BIND format'). It also clarifies the return type ('text'), and the verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like dns_list_records or dns_list_zones.

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 (to obtain a zone file in BIND format) but does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it. For example, it does not mention that users should use dns_list_records for individual records or dns_list_zones for zone summaries. With multiple DNS tools present, this is a clear gap.

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