List Rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination behavior or that the response is an array), but the schema and output schema cover the rest.

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?

Single sentence, no waste. Front-loaded with the purpose. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but currently it's efficient.

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 rich schema with 8 parameters and an output schema, the description is adequately complete. It misses explicit mention of pagination, but the schema parameters (page, page_size) implicitly cover it.

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 high (88%), so the description does not need to elaborate on parameters. The description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable.

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 it lists rules from the Connhex Rules Engine, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_rule (single rule) and list_rule_events (events), but could be more specific about the scope (e.g., all rules with filters).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_rule or list_rule_events. The description lacks context for selecting among siblings.

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