List Mangle Rules

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds that rules are listed in evaluation order, which is a useful behavioral detail not covered by annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: first states core function and ordering, second lists filters. Extremely concise with no wasted words, front-loading the essential information.

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 list tool with optional filters and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: resource, order, and filter capabilities. It could mention what fields are returned, but it is mostly complete.

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 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description merely restates that filtering by chain, action, and disabled state is supported, adding no new meaning beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists firewall mangle rules on a MikroTik router in evaluation order. The verb 'List' and resource 'mangle rules' are specific and differentiate it from sibling list tools like list_firewall_rules.

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 usage for mangle rules with filtering, but it does not explicitly contrast with similar tools like list_firewall_rules or state when not to use it. No exclusion or alternative guidance is provided.

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