list_routes

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

No annotations provided. The description accurately discloses the tool's read-only nature and the specific data returned. It does not mention side effects or prerequisites, but none are expected for a list operation. Behavioral transparency is sufficient for this simple 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word adds value. Ideal conciseness for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool does and what it returns (hosts, handler, upstreams, listen addresses, and route index). Complete for the intended use case.

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 tool has zero parameters; schema coverage is 100% trivially. With no parameters to describe, the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics.

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?

Explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all configured routes (virtual hosts)'. Specifies the returned fields: hosts, handler, upstreams, listen addresses, and route index. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_route (single route) and add_reverse_proxy_route (creation).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use, but the purpose is clear: retrieve an overview of all routes. Siblings like get_route are implied for single route retrieval. For a simple list operation with zero parameters, the description provides adequate context.

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