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

With no annotations, the description discloses the key side effect: all routes are removed, interception is un-armed, and normal networking is restored. This goes beyond a generic summary and tells the agent the post-condition.

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 compact sentences front-load the action and scope, then give the usage instruction. Every word adds value; no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 single-parameter cleanup tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to invoke it, and the result. The agent has enough to select and call it correctly.

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 100% for the only parameter (udid), so the schema already fully explains the parameter. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail, meriting the baseline 3.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Remove' with resource 'ALL browser routes' and scope 'for this device', plus 'un-arm interception'. The full-cap 'ALL' distinguishes this from sibling tools like webpage_mock_remove that operate on individual routes.

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?

Provides explicit timing guidance ('Call this when finished') and the consequence (restores normal networking). It does not explicitly name alternatives like webpage_mock_remove, but the 'ALL' phrasing and sibling list make the selection obvious.

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