route_matrix

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

Describes return format (durations_s, distances_m, null for no route) and the cap limit. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden; missing disclosure of profile options and base_url, but overall transparent about core behavior.

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?

Concise four-sentence paragraph with clear structure. Front-loaded with purpose, uses backticks for code, and no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers core functionality, limit, default, and return format. Has output schema. Lacks documentation of profile and base_url, but given the tool's complexity and sibling context, it is mostly complete.

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%, so description must compensate. Explains origins and destinations as [lat, lon] pairs and default behavior, but omits profile and base_url parameters, leaving half the parameters undocumented.

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?

Clearly states the tool computes a many-to-many travel time/distance matrix via OSRM's table service. Distinguishes from sibling tools like route_osrm (single route) and route_isochrone by specifying matrix functionality and defaults.

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?

Provides clear context: computes many-to-many, destinations default to origins, capped at 25 points per side with suggestion to split larger matrices. Does not explicitly say when not to use or list alternatives, but the guidance is adequate.

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