tvh_list_dvr_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description's help. The description adds only the domain distinction between the two rule kinds; it says nothing about paging behavior for limit/start, ordering of results, or what happens when zero rules exist.

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 sentence with no filler, and the key term ('autorec') is front-loaded. It is efficient but arguably sized too small for a tool with three undocumented parameters.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations carry the safety profile. For a simple paginated list tool the remaining gap — pagination semantics — is minor, and the description supplies the one piece of domain knowledge an agent could not infer elsewhere: what autorec and timerec mean.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does so only for 'kind' by unpacking the otherwise opaque 'autorec'/'timerec' enum values. The 'limit' and 'start' parameters are left entirely unexplained — no indication that they are pagination knobs, defaults, or caps.

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?

Specific verb ('List') plus a resource that is explicitly disambiguated into its two variants, explaining that 'autorec' means automatic EPG recording rules and 'timerec' means recurring clock timers. An agent can tell it apart from the create/list-profile siblings by the word 'rules', though it never names an alternative tool.

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?

Usage is only implied: you call it when you want to enumerate DVR rules of a given kind. There is no statement of when to prefer it over tvh_list_dvr_profiles, tvh_create_dvr_rule, or tvh_list_recordings, and no prerequisites are mentioned.

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