cf_resolve_zone

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

No annotations provided, but description details the API call (GET /zones?name=...&match=all), return envelope structure, and three specific error types (zone_not_allowed, not_found, validation). Does not explicitly state read-only nature or idempotency.

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?

Concise docstring-style structure with Args, Calls, Returns, Errors sections. Front-loaded purpose. Could be slightly more compact but is efficient and well-organized.

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?

Despite no annotations and minimal schema, the description covers input, API call, return structure, and error scenarios comprehensively. Includes disambiguation hint for rare multiple matches, fully meeting the tool's needs.

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 has 0% coverage, but description fully documents the sole parameter zone_name with an example ('example.com') and behavior (trailing dots stripped), providing essential meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Look up a zone ID by its name', specifying the DNS name convention and trailing dot stripping. Distinguishes from sibling tools like cf_get_zone and cf_list_zones by focusing on resolution by name.

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?

Implies usage when a zone name is given, and notes error handling for multiple matches (disambiguation needed). However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like cf_get_zone or cf_list_zones.

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