query_rules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states 'Read' implying no side effects, but lacks details on permissions, return format, or any limitations. For a read tool, this is minimal but acceptable.

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 two short sentences with no redundant information. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, no annotations, and two parameters (one optional), the description provides the essential purpose and usage. However, it lacks details about return values, error handling, or any prerequisites, making it minimally acceptable for a simple read tool.

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 description adds meaning to the 'action' parameter by explaining 'all (list all), get (by UID)', clarifying the enum values beyond the schema. The 'ruleUID' parameter is described as 'Used by: get', which is minimal but helpful. Schema coverage is 50%, and the description compensates somewhat.

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 'Read automation rules' and specifies two actions: list all or get by UID. This distinguishes from sibling tools like manage_rule, but could be more explicit about being read-only.

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 explains when to use each action parameter (all vs get), but does not provide guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like manage_rule or automation. Implicit differentiation is not sufficient.

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