autotask_router

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool provides 'pre-filled parameters' which adds useful behavioral context beyond basic routing. However, it doesn't disclose important details like whether this is a read-only operation, what format the suggestions come in, or any limitations/errors that might occur.

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 just two sentences that efficiently communicate purpose and usage guidelines. Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded with no wasted text.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does a good job explaining what the tool does and when to use it. However, it lacks details about what the output looks like (tool suggestions format) and any behavioral constraints, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 100%, with the single parameter 'intent' well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'describe what you want to do' which aligns with but doesn't significantly expand upon the schema's description. This meets the baseline for high schema 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's purpose as an 'Intelligent tool router' that suggests the right tool with pre-filled parameters based on a natural language description. It uses specific verbs ('describe', 'get') and distinguishes itself from all sibling tools which are specific CRUD operations, making its unique role obvious.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Use this when unsure which tool to call.' This provides clear guidance on its intended context versus the many specific sibling tools listed, effectively distinguishing it as a discovery/helper tool.

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