get_social_media_rules

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly labels the operation as 'Read' and enumerates the content areas covered (content/structure/engagement/visual-strategy, secrets, etc.), which provides useful context beyond simple 'read' semantics. However, it does not disclose potential access requirements or return behavior in detail, though this is less critical for a read operation.

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 comprises two sentences, with the first defining the tool's purpose and scope, and the second providing explicit usage guidance. It avoids redundancy and every sentence contributes meaningful information.

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 the tool has only two optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is sufficiently complete: it explains what data is returned (the rules and their categories), where it comes from (dashboard settings), and when to use it (before setting rules). This covers all necessary context for selection and invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both brandId and platform having full descriptions. The tool description does not add parameter-level semantics; it merely references per-platform rules. Per the baseline rule for high schema coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Read a brand's per-platform social media content rules.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling set_social_media_rules by naming that tool and clarifying its read-only nature.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Call this BEFORE set_social_media_rules so you only change the fields you intend to.' This gives a clear ordering relative to an alternative, which satisfies the dimension's requirement.

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