cdp_list_dqe1_rules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'List' implies a read-only operation, the description doesn't mention pagination behavior (despite offset/limit parameters), authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the output contains. For a list tool with three parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that states the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a list operation and gets straight to the point with zero wasted text.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (which should document return values), the description's main gaps are parameter semantics and usage guidance. However, with no annotations and 0% schema coverage for three parameters, the description doesn't provide enough context for effective tool selection and invocation. It's minimally adequate but leaves important questions unanswered.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and three parameters (tenant_id, offset, limit), the description provides no information about parameter meanings or usage. It doesn't explain what tenant_id filters, how offset/limit work for pagination, or whether parameters are optional (they are, but this isn't stated). The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('DQE Phase 1 data quality rules'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from its sibling 'cdp_list_dqe2_rules' beyond the phase number, missing an opportunity to clarify what distinguishes DQE Phase 1 from Phase 2 rules.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'cdp_get_dqe1_rule' (for retrieving a single rule) and 'cdp_list_dqe2_rules' (for Phase 2 rules), there's no indication of when this list operation is appropriate versus those other options.

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