proxy_add_routing

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing side effects and requirements. It merely states 'Generate proxy routing rules' without indicating whether this writes files, modifies an existing proxy configuration, requires special permissions, or has other behavioral traits.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a basic action statement, though that conciseness comes at the cost of missing essential context captured in other dimensions.

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 two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is far too sparse. It does not explain expected inputs, output, side effects, or how it relates to existing proxy setup, leaving an agent without enough information to invoke it confidently.

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 only 50%, and the api_key parameter is undocumented. The description does not add any information about api_key or directory, so an agent cannot infer why api_key is needed or how it relates to the 'Pro feature'.

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 'Generate' and the resource 'proxy routing rules', so an agent knows the core action. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling proxy tools like proxy_generate_server or nginx_generate_proxy, and the name suggests 'add' rather than 'generate'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only extra context is the parenthetical 'Pro feature', which hints at licensing availability but does not explain prerequisites, when to choose this tool, or exclusions.

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