manage_acl_rule

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

The description reveals that reorder passes an ordered list and 'first match wins', adding behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation. However, it does not detail other mutation behaviors like update/delete effects.

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 front-loaded with the main verb list, but uses a bullet-like layout that could be more structured. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool has 11 parameters and nested objects with no output schema. The description covers list, create, and reorder but lacks details on update/delete and return value format, leaving gaps for a complex tool.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the action enum and providing concrete examples for list and reorder parameters (e.g., ruleIds format), going beyond the schema's descriptions.

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, creates, updates, deletes, or reorders ACL rules, and distinguishes it from firewall policies by mentioning 'fine-grained network access control beyond firewall policies'.

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 when to use the tool (for ACL rules beyond firewall policies) and provides specifics for list, create, and reorder actions, but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools like manage_firewall_policy.

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