rules

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It lists actions (add, update, remove, list) and notes persistence, but omits details like side effects on existing rules, required permissions, or error handling. The behavioral impact is implied but not fully transparent.

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?

The description is three short sentences, each adding value. The first sentence introduces the tool, the second gives a usage cue, and the third explains longevity. No unnecessary words, efficiently structured.

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?

While the description covers purpose and usage timing, it lacks explanation of rule interaction, the effect of each action, or how parameters like priority and tags work in the system. Given no output schema, more context on returned data would help.

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?

All nine parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter context. It does not explain how parameters like priority or scope influence behavior, staying generic.

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 manages behavioral rules with four actions (add, update, remove, list). It explains that rules persist across sessions and guide the AI's work, distinguishing it from sibling tools like grep or search which handle different data.

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 advises checking active rules at the start of each session, providing a specific use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or contrast it with alternatives, leaving some ambiguity.

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