get_routes

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, but it only states 'Get routes for a particular source.' No behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, rate limits, data freshness) are disclosed. The tool could be a simple lookup, but no commitment is made.

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 at one sentence, but it is borderline too terse. It front-loads the action but misses opportunities to add value without becoming verbose. It earns its place but could be improved.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what is returned (e.g., list of routes, objects) or any additional context needed to use the tool effectively.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not add any meaning to the 'source' parameter beyond the enum values. The agent gets no help understanding what each source represents or how to format the input.

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 action (Get routes) and the resource (particular source). It distinguishes from sibling tools, which are get_bulk_avail and get_flights, but does not elaborate on the differences. The purpose is clear but could be more specific about what 'routes' entails.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_bulk_avail or get_flights. The description lacks context for when the tool is appropriate or when to consider other tools.

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