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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does reveal the two authentication modes (otpCode+otpEmail or mroApiKey), which is valuable. However, it does not mention that starting an optimization job is likely asynchronous, what the return value is, or how to track progress via checkOptimization.

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 concise sentences, each earning its place. The first states the primary purpose, the second covers authentication. No filler or redundant information.

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?

This tool initiates a long-running job, but the description omits crucial context about the response format, whether it returns immediately or blocks, and how to check the job status (sibling tool exists). The lack of an output schema and annotations increases the need for these details, making the description adequate but incomplete.

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 provides 100% coverage of all parameters with meaningful descriptions. The description's note about 'either otpCode+otpEmail or mroApiKey' redundantly states what the schema already explains via conditional requirements. No additional format or constraint details are added.

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 uses a specific verb 'Start' with a clear object 'route optimization job' and qualifier 'with multiple addresses', immediately distinguishing it from siblings like checkOptimization, emailResults, and getOneTimeCode. The purpose is unmistakable.

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 clearly states the core action and authentication options, implying when to use this tool (to start a job) versus siblings like checkOptimization (to check status). However, it does not explicitly exclude other contexts or mention alternatives beyond the obvious distinction.

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