route_payload

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: Phase 2 vs Phase 3, approval prompt on human_approval_required, and audit logging. However, it omits details like what happens on no match or error conditions.

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 (around 100 words), front-loads the purpose, and each sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the routing flow, approval gate, and audit trail, which is fairly complete for a Phase 2 routing tool. Missing edge cases like unmatched payloads, but overall adequate given no output schema.

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 single parameter 'payload' has minimal schema description. The tool description adds context about the 11-field structure and its role in routing, but does not detail the fields, so it adds some but not substantial 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 it's Phase 2 routing for 11-field USAP payloads, lists example target MCPs, and distinguishes its role from sibling tools like validate_payload and dispatch_after_approval.

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 explains the routing logic and approval gate, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare to alternatives like validate_payload.

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