Retrieve all active durable project rules for the current repository, clarifying which persistent guidelines and decisions apply. Use it to review stored conventions before starting work.
List all active durable project rules for the current repository.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' clearly signals a non-mutating read operation, and the description adds useful scope details: only active and durable rules, and only for the current repository.
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 front-loads the core action and resource. Every word contributes meaningful information without redundancy.
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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with an output schema present, this description is complete. It specifies what is listed, the scope, and the filtering ('active durable'), leaving no essential calling context missing.
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 tool has zero parametersasi ušak, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The schema coverage is 100% because the input schema is an empty object; the description needs to add nothing here.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('active durable project rules'), and scopes it to the current repository. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling memory tools like list_memories.
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 intended use is implied: call this when you need the active durable project rules for the current repository. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer an alternative or when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.