get_routers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It accurately describes the operation as a read-only list operation returning configuration details. Since there are no side effects or destructive actions, the description sufficiently conveys the tool's behavior.

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 somewhat redundant. The first sentence already conveys the purpose, but the 'Functions' bullet list essentially repeats it with more words. A more concise version could combine the core idea without the bullet list.

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 the tool has no parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately explains that the return is a JSON list of routers with detailed configuration. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 no parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but none is needed. The schema covers 100% of parameters (none), so the description does not need to compensate.

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 retrieves a list of routers with their configuration. It uses specific verb+resource ('Get routers'), and the 'Functions' bullet list reinforces the scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that target other resources like instances or networks.

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 explicitly says 'Use when user requests router information, network connectivity queries, or routing configuration.' This provides clear context for when to employ the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with alternatives.

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