fetch_cc_rules_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format and filtering/pagination parameters but does not mention side effects (likely a read operation), permissions, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. Basic transparency is present but lacks deeper context.

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 concise: two paragraphs covering purpose and usage first, then args and returns. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff. Minor improvement could be merging the first sentence with the guideline for tighter structure.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (list fetch with one param and known output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, and returns. Lacks explanation of the 'CC' acronym and the context of 'control flows', but overall is complete for the agent's needs.

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?

The input schema has 0% coverage (single 'params' object with additionalProperties). The description compensates by listing two specific sub-parameters (name_contains and page_size) with descriptions and defaults, adding significant 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 verb 'Fetch' and the resource 'list of CC rules with only name, description, and id'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like fetch_cc_rule_by_id or fetch_cc_rule_by_name by indicating it returns a list. However, the acronym 'CC' is not explained, which may cause ambiguity.

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 explicitly states 'This tool should ONLY be used for attaching rules to control flows,' providing a strong usage constraint. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not conditions, but the clear directive guides the agent appropriately.

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