rules_path_to

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

The description explains what the tool returns but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only or has side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden; it is not contradictory, but leaves some ambiguity about mutation.

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, concise sentence that fully conveys the core functionality without unnecessary words. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the key action.

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 tool with one parameter, the description covers the main purpose and output content. However, it omits parameter format details and any usage context, leaving some gaps for an agent relying solely on this description.

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 single parameter 'target' is only described by its name and type (string). The description mentions 'target' but does not specify the expected format (e.g., technology ID, civic name) or provide constraints or examples.

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's function: it returns every technology or civic needed (transitively) to reach a given target, including costs and eras. This is specific and distinguishes it from siblings or generic queries.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling tools (e.g., rules_query, rules_lookup). The purpose is inferable, but no conditions or alternative contexts are mentioned.

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