Add Static Route

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing: no required permissions, whether the route takes effect immediately, conflicts with existing routes, or reversibility. For a mutation tool this is a serious gap.

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 text is short but this is under-specification rather than conciseness; a single translated phrase cannot front-load anything useful. Brevity here reflects missing content, not efficiency.

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?

With no annotations, 6 undocumented parameters at 0% schema coverage, and only a name restatement, the definition gives an agent almost nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly. An output schema exists but does not compensate for missing input semantics.

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 0% across 6 parameters (destination, netmask, gateway, metric, comment, interface), and the description mentions none of them. It provides no format hints (e.g., CIDR vs dotted netmask) or meaning for optional fields.

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?

"添加静态路由" is a direct translation of the tool name add_static_route; it restates the resource and verb but adds no scope, differentiation from siblings, or specificity. It is essentially tautological rather than descriptive.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_static_routes, delete_static_route, or get_routing_table. No prerequisites, no context, no exclusions provided.

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