policy_get_access_rule

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

Despite the lack of annotations, the description clearly indicates a read-only retrieval operation through the verb 'Get'. It specifies the key parameter (rule_id), implying the tool returns the rule object. However, it does not mention error handling for missing or invalid ids.

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 a single, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information.

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 simple one-parameter retrieval tool without an output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not describe the structure of the returned Access Rule or mention potential prerequisites like needing an id from a list operation.

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 already has 100% coverage with a detailed description of rule_id as an opaque identifier. The description only reiterates 'by id' without adding new semantic value, so baseline 3 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Access Rule', specifying retrieval by id. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like policy_list_access_rules, which retrieves multiple rules, and mutating tools like policy_create_access_rule.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as policy_list_access_rules for retrieving multiple rules or for listing before selecting. There is no mention of prerequisites or context for its use.

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