list_rule_templatesRetrieve every rule template visible to an EyalSec account, with its rules and categories, covering both account and EyalSec templates.
Every rule template the account can see (its own and the EyalSec ones), with their rules and categories.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds the visibility scope (own vs EyalSec templates), which is genuine context, but the 'with their rules and categories' nesting is also conveyed by the output schema.
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?
A single tight sentence, front-loaded with the resource and scope. No filler, though the trailing 'with their rules and categories' clause is largely redundant against the output schema.
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?
With rich annotations, an output schema, and no parameters, the description covers what an agent needs to call this correctly. The only missing piece is sibling differentiation from list_rules, which is a minor gap for a zero-arg list tool.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond confirming the operation is unpaginated and unfiltered.
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 (implicit list) and resource (rule templates) and clarifies scope: templates the account can see, both its own and EyalSec's. Clear on its own, though it never explicitly contrasts with the sibling list_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 scoping phrase 'every rule template the account can see' implies this is the unfiltered enumeration of templates, which is usable guidance. But it names no alternative and gives no condition for choosing this over list_rules or list_filters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.