add_static_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the write permission requirement but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., duplicate routes, persistence, error handling) or whether the operation is destructive. This is insufficient for a write operation.

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 extremely concise with a two-line header followed by bullet-style parameter explanations. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the structure is front-loaded with the core purpose and requirement.

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 description covers parameter usage well but lacks information about return values, immediate effects, or error responses. For a simple add operation, this is acceptable but not fully complete given no output schema.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining all four parameters with examples and context (e.g., 'mis. 10.20.0.0/24' for dst_address). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type definitions.

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 explicitly states 'Tambah route statis' (Add static route) and provides parameter examples, making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools beyond the name itself, which is unique but not elaborated.

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 includes a required environment variable 'BUTUH MIKROCLAW_ALLOW_WRITE=true', which is a usage condition. However, it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives or provide scenarios where it should not be used.

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