get-rules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does this by stating the operation is a retrieval and by documenting a non-obvious output detail: amounts are in cents and signed as positive for deposits and negative for payments. It does not cover pagination, ordering, or output structure, but for a parameterless list tool these are acceptable gaps.

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 two sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds essential unit and sign semantics that are directly relevant to interpreting the result.

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?

For a no-argument tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and one important output convention, but it leaves some ambiguity about what fields a rule contains and how the list is ordered. Still, an agent can confidently select and invoke the tool based on this description.

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 input schema declares zero parameters and explicitly states the tool accepts no arguments, so parameter-level documentation is unnecessary. With schema description coverage at 100% and no parameters to explain, the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a list of all rules.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like get-transactions or get-payees by naming a unique resource. The additional amount convention reinforces that the tool has a defined output.

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 implies this tool should be used when an agent needs all rules, but it does not explicitly state when to choose it over alternatives or mention any exclusions. The wording gives a clear purpose, but no direct comparison to sibling tools 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.