get_app_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful domain context by defining what an 'app rule' actually is (device-to-profile mapping triggered by app focus), but it says nothing about scope, volume of rules returned, or whether inactive/unmatched apps appear.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that names the outcome first and then clarifies it after the colon. No filler, no repetition of the tool name, nothing that could be cut.

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?

With zero parameters, a full annotation safety profile, and an output schema that documents the return shape, the description only needed to explain the domain meaning of 'app rules' — which it does. The one missing piece is how this snapshot relates to sibling tools like set_app_rule and get_overview.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter surface for the description to compensate for; the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies the call is unfiltered rather than suggesting any implicit scoping argument.

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?

States a specific verb (show) and a concrete resource (automatic profile switching rules mapping apps/devices to profiles). An agent can tell it returns per-device/per-app rule mappings, but the description never contrasts itself with the write counterpart set_app_rule or the broader get_overview, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. Given a sibling set_app_rule exists, plus get_overview/show_profile for inspection, the description should say when this read view is the right one; as written, usage must be inferred from the verb alone.

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