setup_routing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. The description states it creates sends (mutation) but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or error handling. It defines input format but not output or state changes.

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 brief and to the point, with a clear header and args section. Every word is useful, though it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for fields).

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 the tool's simplicity (batch create sends with optional parameters), the description covers the essential information: what it does and how to format the single required parameter. It lacks return value details, but that is acceptable as no output schema exists.

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 the description fully compensates by detailing the JSON array structure and each field (source_track, dest_track, volume_db, pan). However, it provides only an example, not exhaustive documentation of all possible values or defaults.

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 'Batch create sends' with optional volume/pan, which specifies the action (create sends) and scope (batch). This distinguishes it from single-send tools like send_create.

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 implies batch usage but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., send_create for single sends). No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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