list_rules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Offline' but does not explain what this means (e.g., no network required, cached data). The tool is likely read-only, but this is not explicitly stated, leaving the agent uncertain about side effects or dependencies.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff. It is the epitome of conciseness.

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 that there are no parameters and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable amount of information: it names the resource and lists the output fields. However, it could elaborate on what the 'Hook analyzer rule registry' is and how 'Offline' affects behavior. The presence of many sibling tools is mitigated by the clear uniqueness of this 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 input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. According to the guidelines, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing output fields, but this is not parameter semantics. No additional parameter information is needed, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'Enumerate' and the resource 'Hook analyzer rule registry'. It also lists the specific fields returned (id, severity, title, category), making the purpose highly specific and distinguishable from sibling tools.

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 implicitly suggests use when needing a list of rules, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. For a simple enumeration tool, this is adequate but not exemplary.

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