get_decryption_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with '[READ-ONLY]'. The config path adds modest behavioral context about where the data is read from, but it does not disclose details like output shape, pagination, or firewall-specific behavior. Given the annotations cover the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short sentences with no filler. The read-only nature is front-loaded, and the config path detail is useful without being verbose.

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 simple read-only getter with one fully documented optional parameter and safety annotations already present, the description is mostly complete. It could mention what the response contains or how rules are returned, but the low complexity and explicit path context make this a minor gap.

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?

There is only one parameter and the schema already describes it fully, including the 'Required when multiple firewalls are configured' condition, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieves') and a precise resource ('SSL decryption policy rules'), which distinguishes it from nearby siblings like get_decryption_profiles. The addition of the config path removes any ambiguity about which rulebase is being read.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_security_rules, get_decryption_profiles, or get_pbf_rules. The tool name implies the purpose, but the description does not state conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites beyond the optional firewall parameter.

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