list_dns_zones

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose a meaningful return trait — that zones come back with their records — but says nothing about read-only nature, pagination, filtering behavior, or result size limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and its scope are stated immediately and nothing is repeated from the schema or name.

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 three-parameter read-only list tool with fully documented params, the description covers purpose and rough return content. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it could have said more about the shape of the returned records and how the filter/format params affect the result.

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 vdom, filter, and format each documented in the schema including examples, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond that 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?

States a specific verb and resource (list local DNS zones / dns-database) and adds scope ('with their records'), which distinguishes it from the nearby list_dns_servers and get_dns_settings siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the related tools (list_dns_servers, get_dns_settings, create_dns_zone) and no statement of prerequisites or scope conditions. The intended use is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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