Pin an explicit path to a contact

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that setting pathHex to empty string marks contact as direct, and path is up to 64 bytes, which is useful behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds essential information: purpose, usage guidance, and parameter hint.

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 only two parameters, full schema coverage, and an output schema (exists), the description provides sufficient context including max length, pairing with a sibling tool, and when to use. No gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by explaining the meaning of empty pathHex ('mark as direct') and that pathHex represents repeater path-hash bytes, which clarifies the schema's pattern.

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 'Set' and resource 'explicit forwarding path to a contact', distinguishing it from siblings like 'trace_path' which discovers paths, and 'reset_path' which likely clears paths. It specifies that it overrides automatic path discovery, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 'Advanced: only when you want to override automatic path discovery', giving clear guidance on when to use. It also recommends pairing with 'trace_path' first, but does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, which is a minor gap.

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