pmg_ruledb_rule_what_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature and the API path, but lacks details on behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or permission requirements beyond the config note. For a read operation with no annotations, more transparency is expected.

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 very concise with three focused sentences: purpose, API path, and parameter detail. It is front-loaded and contains no extra words, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 tool's simplicity (list with 2 parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, prerequisite, and the key parameter. A minor gap is not explaining what 'what' objects are, but the output schema likely covers return values.

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 to the required parameter 'id_' by specifying it as a positive integer string with an example, which is not in the schema. The other parameter 'proximo_target' is already described in the schema. This improves parameter understanding beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 tool lists 'what' objects attached to a PMG RuleDB rule using the verb 'List', and specifies it's a read operation. The resource is uniquely identified among siblings by the tool name and the API path.

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 the prerequisite configuration ('Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config') and implies usage for reading 'what' objects, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like pmg_ruledb_rule_get or other rule list tools. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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