Retrieve a list of routing instances configured on a specific device, with pagination and filtering options for targeted analysis.
List a device's configured routing instances.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| from | No | Starting index for pagination (zero-based). Default 0. | |
| size | No | Max results per page. 0 returns the API-imposed maximum. | |
| filter | No | Filter condition to apply to the results. | |
| device_uuid | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It only states it lists routing instances, omitting details like read-only nature, pagination, or filtering behavior. This is insufficient for full transparency.
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 concise sentence with no fluff. It could be slightly more structured, but it is efficient.
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?
No output schema exists, but the description does not explain what is returned. It also fails to note that device_uuid is required. Overall, the description leaves significant gaps for a 4-parameter tool.
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 75% (3 of 4 params have descriptions). The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most of the explanation.
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 resource 'routing instances' for a device. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like sdcloud_get_device_config_interfaces, which use the same pattern.
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 or any context about prerequisites. The description lacks any usage scenario or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.