add_blackhole_route

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

Annotations only include destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, providing minimal safety context. The description adds parameter constraints (CIDR format, distance range) but does not disclose behavioral effects such as that a blackhole route discards traffic, persists, or requires administrative privileges. This is a significant transparency gap for a network-configuring tool.

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 a single line plus two bullet-like notes. It is front-loaded with the purpose and each note serves a direct purpose. No filler or redundancy, making it appropriately concise.

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 is very short and does not explain the effect of a blackhole route, when to use it, or what the output contains (output schema exists but is not shown). Given the schema coverage is 0% and context is sparse, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's operation and results.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds useful semantics for dst_address (CIDR example '10.0.0.0/8') and distance (range 1-255), but does not explain 'device' or 'comment' parameters. The notes partially aid parameter understanding but not completely.

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 tool 'Adds a blackhole route', which is a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like add_route and add_default_route because 'blackhole' is uniquely named, though the description does not explicitly contrast it with these alternatives.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_route or add_default_route. It does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or context where a blackhole route is appropriate, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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