List Page Rules Tool

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. Beyond that, the description adds nothing behavioral — no pagination, no result-volume or ordering caveats, no note that filters are optional. It simply restates the 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?

A single short sentence with zero padding and the resource front-loaded. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than true conciseness.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering the read-only nature, the description does not need to explain return values or safety. But for a list tool with filtering and sort parameters, it omits any hint about result shape, pagination, or how filters interact, leaving it minimally adequate.

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%: zone_id, order (with accepted values), and status are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 all page rules for a zone.' An agent can immediately tell this is a read/list operation over page rules. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the many other list_* rules tools in the sibling set (header rules, URL rewrite rules), relying on the name alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as create_page_rule_tool or update_page_rule_tool. The agent must infer from the name that this is the retrieval counterpart to those mutation tools.

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