Add redirect/rewrite rules

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) but not destructive. The description adds the specific POST endpoint, which implies mutation. However, it does not disclose details like order of addition, impact on existing rules, or idempotency beyond what annotations suggest.

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: first repeats the title, second adds the API call. Concise but the first sentence is redundant. It could be more efficient without losing clarity.

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?

With 5 parameters (4 required), no output schema, and no behavioral details, the description is insufficient. Users are left guessing about the effect of adding a route (e.g., order, conflict resolution) and how priority works.

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 only 40%, but the description adds no parameter details. It does not explain the meaning of source, destination, priority, or type beyond the schema's enum and examples. Required parameters (type, source, serviceId, destination) lack contextual guidance.

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 action ('Add redirect/rewrite rules') and the resource ('to the service with the provided ID'), referencing the specific REST API call. It distinguishes from siblings like render_delete_route and render_patch_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., render_patch_route, render_put_routes). Lacks context about prerequisites, limitations, or when adding is appropriate over updating/deleting.

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