get_rule_setFetch a rule set with full rule definitions by slug. Use 'content-safety' as a worked example to retrieve the exact criteria for text scoring.
Fetch a rule set with its full rule definitions. Use 'content-safety' as a worked example when writing your own.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates the result includes full rule definitions, but it does not explain permissions, error behavior, output format, or whether this is a read-only operation beyond the verb 'Fetch'.
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 primary sentence is concise and front-loaded, but the second sentence is ambiguous and potentially distracting. It is brief but not maximally clear or purposeful.
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 simple get-by-slug tool, the description covers the core action but omits important context: what a slug refers to, what the response contains beyond rule definitions, and any edge cases or prerequisites. No output schema or annotations exist to fill these gaps.
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 has 0% description coverage and the only parameter, slug, is not explained. The phrase 'content-safety' hints at a valid slug value, but it is not clearly tied to the parameter, so the description fails to compensate adequately for the missing schema documentation.
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 fetches a rule set with its full rule definitions, which is a specific verb and resource. It partially distinguishes from list_rule_sets by emphasizing full definitions, though it does not explicitly name the sibling alternative.
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 is given about when to use this tool versus list_rule_sets, create_rule_set, or evaluate. The second sentence about using 'content-safety' as a worked example is unclear and does not help route the agent to the correct tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.