routelink_cpr

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: the returned data includes SHA1 hash, ROR, and optionally expanded templates, which are behavioral details beyond the schema.

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?

Single sentence front-loads the main purpose, followed by concise explanations. No wasted words.

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 has two parameters, good annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the necessary context: what CPR is, what is returned, and parameter details. Complete for a retrieval 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 coverage is 100% but the description adds meaning for the 'crn' parameter by explaining zero-padding behavior not in the schema. The 'expand' parameter matches the schema.

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 tool retrieves the full CPR for a toll-free number, defines CPR as a routing decision tree, and lists the returned elements (structure, SHA1, ROR, optionally expanded templates). This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like routelink_lookup and routelink_ror_query.

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 implies the tool is for full CPR retrieval but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance nor alternatives. Siblings are listed but not contrasted.

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