dns_list_cache

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the hierarchical tree return format and the two-step drill-down behavior, which goes beyond the tool name and schema. It does not mention side effects, but as a 'list' operation, this is likely safe.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No filler or 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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, usage, and the general return shape (hierarchical tree). The drill-down pattern is clearly explained, making the tool usable without further clarification.

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 sole parameter 'domain' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage), including its optionality and meaning. The description's mention of calling with no domain and then passing a domain reiterates the schema rather than adding new semantic value.

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 identifies the tool's action and resource: 'List zones in the DNS cache'. It also adds a distinctive behavior (hierarchical tree) that sets it apart from sibling list tools like dns_list_zones or dns_list_records.

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 provides explicit drill-down instructions ('call with no domain to see top-level zones, then pass a domain'), which is useful. However, it does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives such as dns_list_zones or dns_list_records, or when not to use it.

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