pmg_ruledb_rule_create

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses mutation nature, dry-run default, confirmation requirement, config needs, and return value. It also explains the active default and why. However, it does not cover idempotency, error scenarios, or auth specifics beyond config.

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 9 lines and uses bullet-like structure. It front-loads key info (MUTATION, dry-run). Minor improvement could be clearer grouping of parameters, but overall efficient.

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 14 parameters and output schema existence, the description covers main points: purpose, usage, parameter meanings, and return value. It does not cover error cases or post-creation steps (e.g., attaching groups), but output schema exists to supplement return details.

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 only 7%, so description compensates well. It explains name, priority (with range), active (with warning), direction (with values), and the bool flags group. It maps flags to API names. However, it omits proximo_target (covered in schema) and does not individually detail all 14 parameters.

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 'create a PMG RuleDB rule' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like update/delete by focusing on creation. The MUTATION label and dry-run behavior further clarify the intent.

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 explains the default dry-run behavior with confirm=True to execute, and notes the required PROXIMO_PMG_* config. It provides clear context for usage via confirm parameter but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like pmg_ruledb_rule_update.

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