askew_list_routes

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. 'List' communicates a read-only, non-destructive operation, and 'registered to this account' clarifies scope. It does not disclose whether the data is live or cached, or whether an active connection is required, but for a simple listing tool this is a reasonable baseline.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action verb and clearly enumerates the returned items. The parenthetical clarification '(runnable Shortcuts)' adds value without unnecessary length.

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?

For a zero-parameter listing tool, the description covers the essential information: what is listed and the account scope. There is no output schema, but the description implies the return content. It could mention the purpose of the list (e.g., preparing for a run), but that is not strictly necessary.

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 zero parameters and 100% coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description adds relevant context about what is being listed without needing to describe parameters.

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' and the resources: routes (runnable Shortcuts), devices, and connection mode registered to the account. It is specific and understandable, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools by name.

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 intended use is implied: call this when you need to discover routes, devices, or connection state. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings or any mention of prerequisites like authentication or connection status.

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