caddy_remove_route

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

Annotations already mark it destructive and idempotent. The description adds valuable behavior details: index-based removal is read-then-delete and can race against concurrent edits. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand risks.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and each sentence earns its place. The guidance is compact with no fluff, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 4 parameters, no required ones, and annotations cover safety. The description explains targeting and risks but does not mention return values or error behavior. Given no output schema, this is acceptable and sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the preference for @id and the race condition for index, but these are already largely present in the schema's parameter descriptions. The additional race warning is minor added value.

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 'Remove a route' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from siblings like caddy_add_route and caddy_list_routes. It also outlines the two targeting methods, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance on when to use @id vs index, strongly preferring @id for stability and warning about race conditions with index. It does not compare directly with sibling tools, but the context is clear for when this tool is appropriate.

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