configure_rules

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

Discloses that changes apply to all subsequent scans until reconfigured, but lacks details on potential side effects, error handling, or scope (session vs. global). No annotations provided, so description carries full burden.

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?

Concise with three short paragraphs, bullet points for common rules, and an Args section. No wasted words; purpose is front-loaded.

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 configuration tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter explanation, and return value adequately.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates well by providing an example, listing common rule IDs, and explaining the map structure. Adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 specifies a clear verb ('Enable or disable') and resource ('specific accessibility rules'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like scan_page or get_violations.

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?

States when to use ('customize which rules are checked during scans') and that changes persist across scans, but does not explicitly exclude use cases or mention alternatives.

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