create-route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only says 'Create' (implying mutation) but does not disclose side effects, idempotency, permissions needed, or what happens on success/failure. The description is insufficient for a creation 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?

The description is a single sentence, concise and to the point. However, the typo 'Bult' and lack of structure (no bullet points or separate sections) slightly detract. Still efficient.

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 creation tool with 5 parameters (100% schema coverage) but no output schema and no annotations, the description should provide prerequisites (e.g., service must exist), return value, and limitations. It only mentions 'deployed service port' but misses crucial context. Incomplete.

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 100%, with each parameter described in the input schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'generated URL, or custom domain mapping' aligns with 'domain' and 'path' but no new details). 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?

The description clearly states the tool creates a public route, generated URL, or custom domain mapping for a deployed service port, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete-route' and 'update-route', though the typo 'Bult' slightly reduces clarity.

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 mentions 'for a deployed service port' implying a prerequisite, but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tools. With siblings like 'update-route' and 'delete-route', the lack of guidance is a notable gap.

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