list_reporting_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 implies a read-only listing operation, which is clear. However, it does not mention potential behavior such as pagination, ordering, or what specific rule data is returned. For a simple list operation, it is adequate but lacks depth.

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 sentence that is concise and to the point, with no redundant information or filler. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose in the least words necessary.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what the tool does: lists all reporting rules with a specific focus on health thresholds. It could benefit from mentioning the response format, but for a simple list operation, the purpose is clear and the description is reasonably complete.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters, and the baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 identifies the action ('List all reporting rules') and the resource ('reporting rules'), with a specific qualifier that they 'define agent health thresholds'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_configs (different resource) and get_reporting_rule (singular vs plural).

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 such as get_reporting_rule (for a specific rule) or health_check (which might involve thresholds). It simply states what it does without any context on when to choose it over siblings.

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