List redirect/rewrite rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description is not burdened with repeating safety. It adds value by specifying the default behavior (returns all rules if no filters) and the underlying API call. This goes beyond annotations without contradicting them.

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 three sentences, each adding distinct value: purpose, default behavior, and API reference. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no redundant or filler content. Every sentence earns its place.

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 list tool with 6 parameters, no output schema, and solid annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers core functionality and the API call. However, pagination behavior (limit/cursor) is only in the schema, not highlighted in the description, which could improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% with each parameter having a description. The description does not provide additional parameter details beyond 'match the provided filters'. With high schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate; the description adds no extra semantic value for 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 specific resource 'redirect/rewrite rules for a service'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like render_add_route (adds rules) and render_put_routes (replaces all rules) by focusing on read-only listing. The inclusion of the API endpoint further clarifies the scope.

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 explains when to use the tool: to list a service's routes with optional filters, and that omitting filters returns all rules. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for creating or modifying routes) or mention alternatives among siblings. The guidance is clear but lacks exclusions.

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