list_geo_routes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains pagination (CTM caps per_page at ~100, auto-walking pages), truncation warnings, and default status filtering. This goes well beyond a basic 'lists routes' statement and gives the agent essential execution expectations.

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 well-structured with clear paragraph breaks, front-loaded purpose, and every sentence adds useful information. It is long but justified by the behavior it discloses; no filler or redundancy.

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 complexity (4 optional params, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the most critical behavior: pagination, truncation, status defaults, and account-level iteration. It falls short only on explicit parameter documentation for account_ids, though the output schema mitigates return-value ambiguity.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates partially by explaining max_items (raise for large accounts), status (allowed values and default), and per_page (indirectly via CTM cap). However, it does not explicitly explain account_ids semantics, which is a notable gap for a multi-account listing tool.

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 opens with 'List geo routers and conditional routers across sub-accounts,' using a specific verb and resource while distinguishing this list operation from the sibling get_geo_route tool. It also clarifies scope (sub-accounts) and includes both geo routers and conditional routers.

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: it explains default behavior (active sub-accounts only), how to include other statuses, and how to adjust max_items for large accounts. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_geo_route, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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