ncloud_dns_delete_records

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and idempotent, so the description's 'Destructive' and 'permanently removes' are somewhat redundant. However, it adds critical behavioral context: 'Set confirm=true to execute.' This reveals a safety mechanism (confirmation flag) not present in the annotations, which is valuable for correct invocation. No contradictions.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive warning. It efficiently conveys the action, consequences, and the confirmation requirement. While there is slight redundancy between 'Destructive' and 'permanently removes,' every sentence earns its place—no filler or fluff.

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 simple delete operation with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers what is deleted, the permanent nature, and the confirm=true requirement. It could explicitly state what happens when confirm is false (e.g., no-op), but the implication is clear. A minor improvement would be to mention the default, but the schema handles that.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with clear descriptions for domainId, recordIds, and confirm. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'specified records' maps to recordIds, but the schema already says that). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the 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 specific action: 'Delete DNS records from a Global DNS domain.' This uses a specific verb (delete) and resource (DNS records), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, update, or list records. The addition of 'permanently removes' and the confirmation requirement reinforces its distinct destructive purpose.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need to remove DNS records. It states 'Delete' and 'permanently removes,' which is unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives (like update_records for modifying), so it falls short of a 5. Still, the context is clear and there are no misleading exclusions.

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