Ruleset

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

The description discloses side effects and read-only behavior: 'install/remove mutate installed-package state and are audited; search and roll are read-only.' This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint: false) by specifying which actions are mutating and which are not.

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 concise and well-structured: a single introductory sentence listing actions, followed by usage guidance and a side-effect note. It is front-loaded with the most important information and contains no unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers the range of actions, usage conditions, and side effects, making it contextually complete for selecting and invoking the tool. However, it does not describe the return values or output format, which would be useful since there is no output schema.

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 schema already covers all parameters with descriptions indicating the applicable action (e.g., 'Deterministic seed (roll).'). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Manage ruleset packages' and enumerates the specific actions (search, install, remove, list, bind, roll). It is specific and differentiates from alternatives by explicitly naming when to use command and session tools instead.

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 explicit 'Use when' and 'Do NOT use when' sections, including alternatives (command with action: suggest, session with action: health). This gives clear guidance on when to select this tool over others.

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