Get Cloudflare Zone Settings

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: it explains why `off`/`flexible` SSL modes are dangerous (origin fetched over plain HTTP despite the padlock) and gives a precise remediation path for CLOUDFLARE_REAUTHORIZE_REQUIRED, including surfacing connectUrl and the one-click reconnect caveat.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the scope and returned fields, followed by the SSL warning and then the error-recovery instruction. Each sentence adds operational value with no 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 read-only tool with one fully documented parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it lists the returned settings, explains the key warning condition, and covers a specific authorization error with remediation. An agent can invoke and handle the result correctly without further information.

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?

There is only one parameter (`domain`), and the input schema already documents it fully at 100% coverage. The description does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Read the Cloudflare zone settings') and enumerates six concrete settings, so an agent knows exactly what data comes back. It scopes the tool to post-move checks but never names a sibling like get_cloudflare_zone or get_cloudflare_connection to clarify boundaries.

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 phrase 'settings that matter after a move' supplies a clear usage context, and the SSL-mode warning plus the CLOUDFLARE_REAUTHORIZE_REQUIRED recovery flow tell the agent what to do with results and errors. It stops short of explicit when-not guidance or naming set_cloudflare_zone_settings as the write counterpart.

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