create_access_rule

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: the confirm gate and preview vs. execution modes. Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, etc., but the description details the actual operation behavior.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that efficiently convey purpose and key usage guideline. No superfluous information.

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 the lack of an output schema and the openWorldHint annotation, the description covers the critical behavioral nuance of confirm. It could mention return values or error states, but for a creation tool it is adequately 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds extra semantic value for the confirm parameter (human-approval gate, preview vs. execution), enhancing understanding of its role.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'IP/ASN/country access rule', and lists specific actions (block, challenge, whitelist). It distinguishes this from sibling create_* tools by specifying 'access 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?

The description explicitly states the mandatory confirm:true for execution and the preview behavior without it, providing critical usage context. However, it does not compare to alternatives like update or delete access rules, but the given context is sufficient for the main use case.

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