set_connector_routing

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint: false), so the description's 'set' is consistent. However, it does not explain behavioral nuances such as whether setting angle replaces existing waypoints, or how angle_locked/points_locked interact. Adds minimal context beyond annotations.

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, no redundancy, efficiently states purpose.

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?

Tool has 9 optional params with multiple lookup paths (connector_uid vs from_var/to_var) and output schema exists. Description is minimal but schema and annotations compensate. However, it fails to mention required identification strategy or side effects, so not fully complete.

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 covers all 9 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage); description adds 'and/or' combo but no additional detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description: 'Set connector angle and/or explicit routing waypoints' – uses specific verb 'set' and clearly identifies the resource (connector) and the attributes being modified (angle, waypoints). This distinguishes it from sibling creation tools like add_connector.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Description does not mention that it operates on existing connectors, nor does it contrast with add_connector or sync_connectors_from_equations.

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