get_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the tool returns a 'primary read-only payload', indicating a non-destructive read. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits (e.g., whether the data is cached in real-time).

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?

The description is exceptionally concise with two pithy sentences. Every word serves a purpose: the verb, examples, and return type are front-loaded. No unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks clarity on the 'primary read-only payload' structure. An agent cannot infer the return format without additional context, which would be helpful for a complete understanding.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a description for 'route_id'. The tool description adds extra value by listing example route IDs (dashboard, markets, portfolio, backtest) and noting that 'command center is under settings', which aids correct invocation beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the goal with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('current state of one route'), and provides concrete examples like 'dashboard, markets, portfolio, backtest'. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_routes' by specifying it fetches one route's state, not a list.

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 implies usage for fetching a single route's data, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as 'list_routes' for listing all routes or 'run_action' for mutations. No when-not or prerequisite guidance is provided.

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