autotask_router

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool's behavior (suggesting tools with pre-filled parameters) but lacks details on limitations, handling of ambiguous intents, or potential side effects.

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?

One concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key concept 'Intelligent tool router'. No unnecessary words; every part 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 simple router tool with one parameter, the description is complete and covers what an agent needs to know. No output schema is needed because the tool returns suggestions, not structured data.

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 single parameter 'intent' has a clear description in the schema (100% coverage). The tool's description reiterates its purpose, adding context that it is a natural language query, which is helpful but not extensive.

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 it is an intelligent tool router that suggests tools and pre-fills parameters based on natural language intent. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being a meta-tool for routing.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when unsure which tool to call', providing clear context. It implies the router is for exploration, though it doesn't explicitly state when to use alternatives directly.

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