pmg_ruledb_rule_actions_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool reads from an alternative endpoint and extracts embedded data due to a 501 error on the dedicated path, which is a critical implementation detail.

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 with 4 sentences, front-loading the core purpose. The technical detail about the workaround is necessary but slightly verbose; however, it is efficiently communicated.

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 presence of an output schema, return values do not need explanation. The description covers prerequisites, parameter usage, and a behavioral quirk. It is adequate for a list tool, though it could mention error handling.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying the ID format: 'positive integer string, e.g. "100".' The schema only indicates string type, so this clarification is valuable, especially since schema coverage is only 50%.

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 the "actions" objects attached to a PMG RuleDB rule (read).' This provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pmg_ruledb_rule_action_attach and pmg_ruledb_rule_action_detach.

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 mentions 'Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config' as a prerequisite and explains the workaround for a non-functional endpoint. While it does not explicitly compare to alternatives, it provides clear context for when this tool should be used.

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