Lists every lint rule for Palace electromagnetic simulation configs, showing each rule's lesson and source to guide valid setup before generating or launching runs.
List every lint rule with its lesson and source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. "List" strongly implies a non-mutating read, and it discloses the returned fields, but it says nothing about permissions, caching, or whether the list is exhaustive across workspaces.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the action and the payload are stated immediately and nothing is wasted.
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-arg read-only listing tool the description is nearly sufficient, but terms like "lesson" and "source" are undefined jargon and there is no output schema to clarify them. Slightly more explanation of what a rule record contains would close the gap.
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 takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to compensate for on the parameter side.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("List every lint rule") and even previews the returned fields (lesson, source). It is clearly distinguishable in intent from palace_lint_config, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with that sibling.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this versus palace_lint_config or palace_check, and no prerequisites or conditions are stated. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.