ypollak2/llm-router

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses core behavioral traits: automatic decomposition, multi-model routing, and tier-based step limits. Could improve by disclosing error handling behavior (what happens if a step fails), idempotency, or whether partial results are returned.

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?

Well-structured and front-loaded: purpose (sentence 1), mechanism (sentence 2), usage pattern (sentence 3), constraints (sentences 4-5), parameters (final section). Efficient use of space, though 'Args:' section is slightly informal. No wasted sentences.

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 high complexity (multi-step orchestration) and presence of output schema, description adequately covers invocation requirements, behavioral constraints, and parameters. Minor gap: lacks discussion of side effects, persistence of intermediate steps, or timeout behavior expected for long-running orchestration tasks.

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%—neither parameter has a schema description. Description fully compensates: defines 'task' as the 'complex task to accomplish,' and details 'template' with four specific enum values ('research_report', 'competitive_analysis', etc.) and explains omitting it triggers auto-decomposition.

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?

Opens with specific verb 'Multi-step orchestration' and resource 'complex tasks across multiple LLMs.' Explicitly distinguishes from single-step siblings (llm_generate, llm_analyze) by detailing chaining of 'research, analysis, generation, and coding steps' and 'routing each to the optimal model.'

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 internal usage guidance: 'Use templates for common patterns or let the AI decompose' and lists four specific template options. Includes operational constraints (Free tier: 2-step vs Pro: unlimited). Lacks explicit comparison to specific sibling tools like llm_pipeline_templates or llm_research for when to prefer those over this.

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