search_routes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a notable behavior: 'Automatically fetches latest routes from RSSHub API and caches them,' which explains data freshness and potential cache use. It does not explicitly state read-only status, but 'search' strongly implies it.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise and well-structured without redundancies.

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?

For a simple one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it searches, how it works (fuzzy, caching), and data source. It could mention the return format, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 100% with a clear description of the 'query' parameter. The description adds 'fuzzy search' and enumerates searchable entities (platform names, route names, categories), going beyond the schema's examples and enriching parameter semantics.

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 'Search RSSHub routes' with a specific verb and resource. It further elaborates on fuzzy search and searchable fields, distinguishing it from siblings like get_feed or subscribe, which are about feed retrieval and subscription management.

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?

Usage is implied: use this tool to search for routes. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or when to prefer a sibling tool. For example, it doesn't mention that get_feed is for fetching a specific feed once a route is known.

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