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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Returns metadata only', which clarifies response granularity, but it doesn't disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or errors. This is useful but not rich 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?

Two short sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence 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 read-only list with two optional, well-documented parameters, the description plus annotations provide everything needed to invoke it correctly. It also properly routes to get_routing_strategy for full details.

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% with clear descriptions for limit and cursor. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, and per baseline a 3 is appropriate when the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a concrete verb ('List'), a specific resource ('routing strategies'), and a scope ('in the workspace'). The phrase 'Returns metadata only; use get for full details' differentiates it from get_routing_strategy.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent this tool is for listing metadata and directs it to the get tool when full details are needed. This is a clear when-to-use versus alternative guidance, even though it doesn't enumerate every sibling.

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