get_geo_route

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of the `fields` parameter (comma-separated list of top-level keys, returns subset, cheaper) which adds useful context beyond the schema. It does not mention auth or side effects, but the operation is clearly a read-only fetch by its name.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence efficiently explains the optional parameter with a concrete example. Every word earns its place; no filler.

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?

The tool is simple with an output schema available, so return values are covered. The description covers the main purpose and the only non-obvious parameter behavior. No external dependencies or edge cases are left unaddressed for this type of retrieval operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does an excellent job explaining the `fields` parameter's syntax and purpose, but gives no additional semantics for `geo_route_id` and `account_id`, which are largely self-explanatory from their names and the required 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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'specific geo router', distinguishing it from list_geo_routes and other get_* tools. The scope is specific to retrieving details for one router identified by an ID.

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 provides clear context for when to use the `fields` parameter (e.g., when checking several routes in a row), but it does not explicitly contrast this tool with the sibling `list_geo_routes` or state when to prefer one over the other. The intent is implied but not fully explicit.

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