samsara_list_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, whether it returns limited fields, or any rate limits or data freshness considerations. The only behavioral hint is that routes contain 'ordered stops with addresses, times, and status tracking,' but this is more structural than behavioral.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence is a clear statement of purpose, the second adds context about route semantics. No unnecessary words.

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 has only 2 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete for a simple listing endpoint. However, it could benefit from noting the default limit or that this returns a paginated list, but the schema already covers limit default, so this is acceptable.

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%, and the description does not add parameter-level details beyond what the schema provides (pagination cursor and limit with default). The schema already describes both parameters well, so the description does not need to compensate. A 4 acknowledges the schema does its job, while the description adds no redundancy.

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 'List all routes' with a specific verb and resource, and adds detail differentiating routes from other entities: 'Routes contain ordered stops with addresses, times, and status tracking.' This provides semantic distinction in a large sibling set including vehicles, drivers, webhooks, etc.

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 listing route data but offers no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like samsara_get_route (single route) or samsara_create_route (creation). No context on pagination, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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