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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds the substring-matching semantics of the filter, which is useful, but says nothing about result ordering, pagination behavior, or what a rule record contains.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the filter capability is stated immediately. It is arguably too terse given the undocumented paging parameters, 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?

No output schema and zero schema coverage mean the description should explain the paging contract and the shape of returned rules; it does neither. For a three-parameter list tool it leaves an agent guessing about result size and how to page through large rule sets.

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 0% for all three parameters, so the description carries the burden. It only explains title_query as a substring filter and never mentions page or per_page (defaults 1 and 50), leaving two of three parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 ('seliee_rules') plus the optional title-substring filter, so the operation is unambiguous. It does not differentiate from the sibling list_ads_rules, which handles a different rules collection, leaving an agent to infer the distinction from the name alone.

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 indication of when to use this versus list_ads_rules, get_rule, or the other rule-related siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. The only guidance is the implicit 'use title_query to filter' hint.

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