tickory_add_relay_route

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must shoulder the burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'add' with no mention of side effects, idempotency, error behavior, or required permissions. An agent cannot infer whether this operation is destructive or safe.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no redundant or extraneous information. Every word contributes to the core function.

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 that an output schema exists (context indicates true), return values need not be explained. The description covers the basic functionality, but fails to note conditional parameter dependencies (e.g., email required when destination_type=email) which are in the schema but not highlighted. Also, the existence of a source is implied but not clarified. Overall, adequate but with gaps.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already described in the schema. The tool description does not add meaningful new context about parameters; it only briefly mentions delivery types which are already in the enum. Thus, the description adds minimal value beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 what the tool does: 'Add one direct relay destination to a TradingView source for telegram, webhook, discord, or email delivery.' It specifies the verb (add) and the resource (relay destination), and lists the supported delivery methods. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'tickory_create_relay_source' which creates a new source, but the purpose is still distinct enough.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., the source must exist) or scenarios. It lacks contextual pointers that would help an agent decide to invoke this tool.

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