template_get_routing_workflow

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It states it 'Returns step-by-step instructions with tool calls and dependencies,' making its read-only, informational nature clear. It could explicitly note that it makes no changes, but the 'get' verb and 'instructions' imply this.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then detailing the return value and usage. Every word earns its place, with no filler or 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?

Given the presence of an output schema and the simple nature of the tool, the description covers purpose, usage timing, and return content. It lists the routing components covered and indicates it provides dependencies, making it complete for agent guidance.

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?

Input schema fully describes both required parameters (instance_id and region) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get the complete workflow for setting up routing' with specific components (hours, queues, profiles, flows). It uses a specific verb (get) and resource (routing workflow), distinguishing it from the sibling template_get_case_workflow.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Use this before creating routing configuration to ensure correct order,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention when not to use or name alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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