list_notification_rules

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

With no annotations, the description explains the rule matching behavior (wildcards, AND logic) and that each rule targets one binding. It does not disclose aspects like pagination, ordering, or read-only nature, but for a simple list operation, it provides adequate transparency.

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?

Two terse sentences: the first front-loads the action, the second explains the rule semantics. No redundancy, every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite no output schema and zero parameters, the description explains the core concept of routing rules sufficiently for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and behavior. Minor gaps like pagination or sorting details are not critical for a basic list.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description adds context about what is listed (routing rules with specific dimensions) beyond the empty schema, giving meaning to the output.

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 lists 'Telegram routing rules,' using a specific verb and resource. It further explains the structure of each rule (ANDing dimensions, wildcards, target binding), making it distinct from siblings like list_notifications or list_notification_channels.

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 clarifies that the tool lists routing rules, implying its use for retrieving these rules. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings (e.g., list_notifications) or provide exclusions. The context is clear but lacks definitive guidance.

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