route_model

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Returns recommendation with decision_path audit trail' and 'Free — no metering', which implies read-only and cost-free behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. The cost hint is valuable but incomplete.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence establishes the core action, the second adds key details (audit trail, pricing). It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could benefit from a bit more structure.

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?

Despite 8 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks details about the recommendation format, error handling, or how the routing algorithms work. For a tool with many configurable inputs, the description is too brief to be fully informative.

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?

All 8 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage). The description provides context that the parameters are used for routing, but it adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already offers. 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?

The description clearly states 'Route to the optimal model' which is a specific verb+resource. It lists the factors considered (complexity, risk, budget, latency), making the purpose distinct. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like classify_task or configure_optimizer.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as classify_task or estimate_cost. The description implies it should be used for model selection but gives no scenarios or exclusions.

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