List custom 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. The description adds the scope constraint ('for one profile') but doesn't describe any additional behavior like pagination, return format, or error handling. Since annotations carry the safety burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with action and resource. Every word adds value; no fluff.

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 list operation with one required parameter and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does. It names the resource, scope, and implies the parameter. Complete for this complexity level.

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 coverage is 100% – the schema describes 'profile' as 'Exact profile name or profile ID'. The description adds 'for one profile' which reinforces that it's a single profile. No extra semantic value beyond schema, but baseline is 3 when schema is fully descriptive.

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 'List all custom rules for one profile' clearly states the action (list), the resource (custom rules), and the scope (for one profile). It distinguishes from siblings like list_profiles (which lists profiles) and create_*_rules (which creates rules). No ambiguity.

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 implies when to use: to fetch custom rules for a specific profile. Given the sibling names (create_*_rules, delete_rules), the context is clear. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use, but the read-only nature is obvious. Could mention that profile must be exact from list_profiles, but that's implicit in schema.

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