vrfsGetFabricStaticRoute

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It lacks details on behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what 'get' entails (e.g., read-only, returns configuration data). The description doesn't add meaningful context beyond the minimal purpose.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse, though it lacks depth.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format, error conditions, or how it fits into the broader fabric/VRF context. Sibling tools suggest it's part of a configuration management system, but this isn't clarified.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all parameters well-documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond implying a 'specific' route via 'routeId', which is already covered in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter semantics effectively.

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 'Get a specific static route' clearly states the action (get) and resource (static route), but it's vague about scope and context. It doesn't specify what kind of static route (fabric-related) or differentiate from sibling tools like 'vrfsGetFabricStaticRoutes' (plural) which likely retrieves multiple routes.

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 is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing a fabric, VRF, and route ID, or contrast it with sibling tools like 'vrfsGetFabricStaticRoutes' for listing routes or 'vrfsUpdateFabricStaticRoute' for modifications.

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