rule_detail

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

The [READ] tag and readOnlyHint=true already establish the safe-read profile. The description adds useful context that the identifier is an OPNsense uuid or a pfSense id, but says nothing about return shape or behavior on an unknown id. Adequate rather than rich.

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?

Front-loaded purpose line followed by a compact args list with zero padding. Every line earns its place, though the args block is slightly list-like rather than prose.

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 read-only lookup with no output schema, the agent knows how to obtain the id and how target works, but gets no sense of what 'full detail' returns. Complete enough to invoke, not complete enough to anticipate the response.

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%, so the description carries the load. It explains both parameters: uuid is an OPNsense uuid or pfSense id sourced from list_rules, and target is a firewall name from config that can be omitted for the default. Good compensation for the empty schema.

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 and resource: 'One rule's full detail by uuid/id.' It is clearly distinguishable from list siblings via the singular 'one rule', though it never names the sibling it complements (list_rules) or contrasts with rule_stats/rule_states.

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?

Implies the workflow by saying the uuid comes 'from list_rules', which hints at when to call this after listing. There is no explicit when-not or alternatives guidance, so usage is only implied rather than spelled out.

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