liara_create_zone

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Create' implies a write/mutation operation, but the description doesn't specify permissions required, whether this operation is idempotent, what happens on duplicate zone creation, rate limits, or what the tool returns. For a creation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple creation tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what a DNS zone is in this context, what happens after creation, whether it returns a zone ID or confirmation, or any error conditions. Given the complexity of DNS management and the lack of structured metadata, more context is needed.

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% with the single parameter 'name' fully documented as 'Zone name (domain)'. The description doesn't add any additional parameter context beyond what the schema provides, such as format requirements (e.g., FQDN) or validation rules. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Create') and resource ('new DNS zone'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like liara_get_zone (read) and liara_delete_zone (delete), though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from liara_add_domain which might have overlapping functionality.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like liara_add_domain or liara_set_default_subdomain. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases for creating a DNS zone versus other domain-related operations.

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