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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the useful detail that these rules produce user notifications for new leads, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or whether disabled rules are included.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler, and the purpose is front-loaded. It is arguably too terse given the gaps elsewhere, but nothing is wasted.

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 two-required-parameter list tool with no output schema and no schema parameter descriptions, the description should explain the scoping inputs and at least sketch what a returned rule contains. Neither is present, so an agent knows the topic but not how to call it correctly.

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?

Both parameters have 0% schema description coverage, and the description doesn't mention projectId or siteId at all. The parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description does nothing to compensate for the missing schema documentation or clarify whether rules are scoped to the site, the project, or both.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (lead alert rules) plus what the rules do (notify about new leads), which is enough to distinguish it from list_leads and get_leads. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 on when to use this versus list_leads or get_leads_overview, and no mention that both projectId and siteId are required scoping inputs. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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