dns_record_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that it lists all DNS records, but doesn't reveal whether results are paginated, what record fields are returned, how errors are handled, or that the optional filterType is available. This minimal disclosure leaves the agent without important behavioral context.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and object. It is concise and easy to parse, though it could have included extra useful details without harming conciseness. The structure is efficient, earning a 4.

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 tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential action but lacks completeness. It doesn't mention the optional filterType in the description text, nor does it describe the expected output shape. It is minimally viable but leaves gaps that could affect correct invocation.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameters (domain and filterType) with clear explanations. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already carries the burden.

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 'List all DNS records for a domain' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('DNS records'), clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like dns_record_add, dns_record_update, and dns_record_remove, as well as domain_list, which lists domains rather than DNS records.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention conditions like 'use this to view all records' or exclude cases where filtering would require dns_record_list with filterType. The only implied usage is from the action itself, but no explicit context or exclusions are given.

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