orchestrate_request_tool

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full weight. It discloses dynamic routing, goal-aligned polishing, and return of a structured plan. It omits error handling or edge cases but is adequate for an orchestrator tool.

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?

Three concise sentences: first defines primary action, second adds a key feature, third states usage context. No unnecessary words and well front-loaded.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so the description only needs to hint at return value (structured execution plan). It covers routing and quality directives. Could mention error handling but overall adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 single required parameter 'user_prompt' is described in context (the user's request to be routed). The description adds meaning beyond the schema, which lacks per-property descriptions (0% coverage).

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 analyzes and routes user requests to relevant MCP servers and skills, and returns an execution plan. It distinguishes itself from siblings as an orchestrator and explicitly recommends calling it at the start of complex requests.

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 gives explicit guidance to call the tool 'at the very start of complex requests', but does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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