list_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral transparency. It correctly implies a read-only operation by stating it 'lists' routes, but it does not disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, or whether the list is paginated. The transparency is adequate but not enriched beyond the obvious.

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 a single, concise sentence that contains all essential information without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every phrase 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the main points: what is listed and the included attributes. It could potentially mention if there is pagination or limits, but for a basic list operation, it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% (environmentId is described as 'Environment UUID'). The description does not add additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. The parameter is straightforward, and the schema handles the semantics adequately.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'routes', the scope 'all routes in a Mockoon environment', and the specific attributes returned (UUIDs, method, endpoint, number of responses). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_route' (single route) and 'create_route'.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using 'get_route' for a specific route. Usage is implied by the listing purpose, but no exclusions or contextual guidance is provided.

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