get_route

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so description adds minimal extra behavioral context. It mentions 'full detail' but does not elaborate on what that includes; output schema fills the 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with key information, no unnecessary words. Every part earns its place.

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 simplicity (one parameter, read-only, output schema present), the description is complete enough for an agent to understand purpose and usage without additional info.

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 coverage is 0% for the single parameter route_id. The description adds meaning by saying 'by its id (e.g., from an NFC tag)', indicating the source and use of the parameter, but does not provide format or constraints.

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 verb 'Get', resource 'full detail for a single route/problem', and method 'by its id', with an example usage (NFC tag). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_routes which list multiple items.

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 implies when to use (when you have a specific route id and need full detail) but does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use. The sibling list_routes provides a contrasting use case.

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