list_acl_rules

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name and the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not mention pagination, filtering, or return format. Since readOnlyHint=true is already present, the description does not contradict annotations but also provides no additional transparency.

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 one short clause, no filler, and appropriately sized for a simple list operation.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with an output schema, the description is sufficient. It clearly identifies the tool's purpose with no missing required information.

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 and the input schema is empty. Schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description doesn't need to explain any parameter semantics.

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 'List ACL access control rules' (列出 ACL 访问控制规则), using a specific verb 'list' and resource 'ACL rules'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_acl_rule, delete_acl_rule, and toggle_acl_rule.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It simply states the action without mentioning exclusions or alternatives. The naming convention and sibling tools imply it's the read-only list operation for ACL rules, so usage is somewhat implied.

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