put_routers_configs_default

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

Annotations already indicate not read-only and not destructive. The description adds permission requirements and clarifies the effect on new routers. It does not detail idempotency or other behavioral traits, but the added context is sufficient for this simple mutation.

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 two sentences plus endpoint, no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and permission, then explains parameter usage. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, permission, parameter behavior, effect, and endpoint. It is complete and leaves no obvious gaps.

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?

Input schema already describes the 'configId' parameter. The description adds the crucial nuance: using an empty string removes the default config, which is not in the schema description. This adds significant value beyond 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 verb 'Set' and resource 'default router config', and specifies the action: setting the default config on the account. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_routers_configs_default (read) and put_routers_configs_assign (assign to routers) by focusing on the default setting.

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 provides required permissions and explicitly mentions using an empty string to remove the default config. It explains the effect on new routers but does not compare with alternative tools like put_routers_configs_by_config_id or put_routers_configs_assign, leaving some usage context implicit.

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