opnsense_route_add

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses the additive operation and the need for activation via apply. It does not mention side effects, permissions, or limits, but for a simple add tool this is adequate and clearly conveys non-read-only nature.

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 short, front-loaded sentences. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating the action and providing workflow guidance (prerequisite and follow-up). No fluff 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?

Given no output schema and low complexity, the description covers the essential: purpose, key parameter constraint, and activation step. The optional parameters are self-explanatory from the schema, so the description is complete enough for correct tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description reiterates the gateway constraint already in the schema ('must be a gateway name from opnsense_route_gateway_list'), adding no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Add a static route,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete, update, list by context and explicit workflow mention (gateway list prerequisite, apply afterwards).

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 provides clear directives: use a gateway from opnsense_route_gateway_list, and run opnsense_route_apply to activate. However, it doesn't explicitly compare with alternatives like update or delete, though the tool name and sibling list make the distinction implicit.

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