list_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a list of routes with stable IDs and reflects the current canvas state. This is useful behavioral context, though it does not address potential limitations like pagination or performance.

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 concise: two short sentences cover purpose, return values, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the most important information and contains no filler or repetition.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, what it returns, when to use it, and the stability of route IDs, leaving no ambiguity about its purpose or invocation.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the returned data (route IDs for removal/duplicate avoidance), which compensates for the lack of parameter details.

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 opens with a clear verb-resource pair: 'List all routes' on the 'Design Canvas'. It specifies what is returned (route ID, path, viewport dimensions, canvas position), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_route, remove_route, and capture_canvas.

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?

Usage guidance is explicit: 'Call this before removing routes... or before adding routes'. This tells when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it. The context is clear, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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