list_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. The word 'stable' is a genuine behavioral hint that unstable/deprecated rules are excluded, but nothing is said about pagination, result size, or whether the call is side-effect free (implied by 'List').

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 with no filler; the verb and the returned fields appear immediately.

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?

An output schema exists, so explaining return values is redundant (and mildly duplicative here). For a zero-parameter catalog listing, the definition is largely sufficient, though it omits how the output connects to 'scan'.

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 the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to compensate for on the input side.

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 ('List') and resource ('audit rule') and enumerates the fields returned (IDs, severity, descriptions, remediation). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling 'scan', though it never explicitly says so.

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?

No statement of when to call this versus 'scan', nor any workflow context (e.g., use this first to obtain rule IDs). The agent must infer the relationship from the tool names alone.

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