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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the destructive scope ('Remove ALL routes'), the disarm action ('un-arm interception'), and the resulting state ('restores completely normal networking'). This is strong behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded, followed by a clear usage directive and outcome. Every phrase earns its place.

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 single-parameter teardown tool, the description is complete: it states what is removed, what is un-armed, when to call it, and what the final network state will be. No output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required.

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 schema already documents the single required parameter, udid, at 100% coverage. The description only reinforces that the operation targets 'this device,' adding no new semantic detail, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific action ('Remove ALL Safari/WKWebView routes'), the scope ('for this device'), and the secondary effect ('un-arm interception'). This clearly differentiates it from selective tools like ios_safari_mock_remove and from similar clear tools on other platforms.

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?

It gives an explicit usage trigger: 'Call this when finished.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the cleanup intent and the 'Remove ALL' phrasing make selection straightforward.

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