bookshelf_get_system_routes_duplicate

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation, but the description adds no useful behavioral context. The meaning of 'duplicate' is not explained, and no details about return data, pagination, or limitations are provided. It does not contradict annotations, but it adds ambiguity rather than 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 very short, which is concise, but it is under-specified. The term 'duplicate' is confusing and not explained, so the brevity comes at the cost of 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?

Even though the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is incomplete because it fails to clarify what 'duplicate' means and how it relates to the sibling 'bookshelf_get_system_routes'. This is a significant gap for correct tool selection.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the schema already confirms no parameters exist.

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 'List system routes duplicate' has a verb and resource, but the word 'duplicate' is ambiguous. It does not clarify whether it lists duplicate system routes or is a duplicate endpoint of 'bookshelf_get_system_routes'. Without this distinction, the purpose is unclear.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'bookshelf_get_system_routes' or any other alternative. The description does not mention any context or exclusions.

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