list_routes

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry behavioral transparency. It states the scope ('available to current user') but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether it refreshes data. For a read-like operation, it lacks detail.

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 efficiently conveys purpose, scope, and content without wasted words.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it specifies what fields are included, what is excluded, and the user scope. It could explicitly state it returns a list, but that is implied.

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?

Tool has zero parameters; schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are none. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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 it lists available data route directories, specifies it's lightweight with limited fields (routeSlug, name, description, category), and explicitly excludes input/return fields. This distinguishes it from a detailed tool like get_route_detail.

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?

Description implies usage for a quick summary view by stating 'lightweight' and listing excluded fields, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus siblings like get_route_detail or query_data.

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