get_filter_rule

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to restate safety. The description adds useful context around rule_id interpretation, but it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as error handling, authorization, or potential side effects—though none are expected for a read operation.

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 compact and every sentence carries meaning. The main purpose is stated first, and the only supplementary note is directly about the required parameter. There is no redundant or meandering text.

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, safe read operation with an output schema available, this description is largely complete. It covers the required parameter and points toward list output. The only notable gap is the lack of explicit guidance about how to select or use the optional device parameter.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates well for the required rule_id parameter by explaining positional numbers versus internal IDs with examples. The optional device parameter remains only partially documented in the schema, which keeps this from a full score.

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 states exactly what the tool does: 'Gets detailed information about a specific firewall filter rule.' The verb–resource pair is clear, and 'specific firewall filter rule' distinguishes it from list_filter_rules and from the get_nat_rule sibling.

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 implies that this tool is for retrieving a single filter rule by rule_id, and the note about 'list output' hints that list_filter_rules should be consulted first. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide exclusion cases, so the guidance remains implicit.

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