list_dns_policies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and handles it well. It discloses the default page-draining behavior, native page size, return shape ({data, totalCount}), manual pagination via offset/limit, and the incomplete flag for a capped drain — key behavioral traits an agent needs.

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 compact and well structured: purpose first, then parameter formats, then pagination behavior. Every sentence contributes essential information without repetition or filler.

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 list operation with an output schema available, the description is complete. It covers the required parameters, pagination semantics, default behavior, and response shape. No critical call-time information appears to be missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for host (console name, ID, or composite ID), site (name or ID), and explains the role of offset/limit in selecting a single manual page. This covers all four parameters, though limit/offset could be further clarified (e.g., whether limit is a count or max page size).

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List all DNS policies for a site.' It clearly identifies the operation's scope (site) and distinguishes this list operation from single-policy siblings like get_dns_policy.

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 gives clear operational context: it explains that pagination is offset-based, defaults to draining all pages, and describes the manual page mode. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_dns_policy, but the list-vs-get distinction is strongly implied by the 'all DNS policies' scope.

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