get_ruler_rules

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 does not disclose any potential side effects, permissions required, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only (though 'get' implies it). The lack of such details limits transparency.

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 and well-structured, with separate lines for the main purpose, return format, an alternative note, and the argument description. Every sentence adds meaningful information without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

The description provides the essential information for an agent to understand the tool's purpose, output, and parameter. It does not cover error cases or additional nuances, but for a simple getter that is acceptable. It lacks details that could be considered nice-to-have, like examples, but is otherwise complete.

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 schema has no descriptions for the parameter, and the description adds only a minimal explanation: 'Name of the Grafana connection'. This clarifies the parameter's role but does not elaborate on accepted values, defaults, or how the connection is used. It adds some meaning beyond the raw schema but not much.

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 action ('Get all alert rules') and the specific resource ('Ruler API'). It also specifies the return format (dict mapping namespace to rule groups), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_alert_rule_by_uid or get_ruler_namespace_rules.

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 says 'This is the non-admin alternative to the Provisioning API', providing some context about a use case. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over other similar listing tools (e.g., get_ruler_namespace_rules) or mention any prerequisites or conditions for use.

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