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

Annotations only supply destructiveHint=true, so the description adds real value: irreversibility, the live-route side effect, the deliberate default inversion versus OptimoRoute's own API default, and the ERR_NOTHING_TO_SEND error condition. It does not mention auth/permission requirements or what a successful response contains, so not quite a 5.

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?

Front-loads the action and the irreversibility warning, then appends the parameter caveat, error code, and verification tool. Four compact sentences, none redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description still discloses the failure mode (ERR_NOTHING_TO_SEND) and the recommended confirmation path. For a two-parameter destructive dispatch tool, nothing an agent needs to invoke it safely is missing.

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 coverage is already 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics the schema cannot: that sendNotifications defaults to FALSE in this wrapper even though the underlying API defaults to true, plus the Order Tracking settings that govern it. That override nuance is genuinely useful.

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 specific verb and resource ('Dispatch the routes for a date to the drivers' mobile app') and anchors it to the equivalent UI action ('the web app's Send Routes'), which lets an agent distinguish it from read-only siblings like optimoroute_get_routes or optimoroute_get_dispatch_status.

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 scopes when to use it (dispatch a date's routes), warns 'CANNOT be unsent', gives the condition for setting sendNotifications true, and routes the agent to optimoroute_get_dispatch_status for confirmation. This covers when-to-use, the irreversibility caveat, and the verification alternative.

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