memory_get_rules

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

The description mentions caching and direct SQL, which gives some insight into behavior. However, with no annotations, it fails to disclose important traits like read-only nature or side effects. The caching hint is useful but incomplete.

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 sentence, very concise, but lacks essential details that could be added without verbosity. It is appropriately short but sacrifices clarity.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the tool is partially documented, but the description fails to explain the purpose of the parameter, the meaning of 'rules', or the role of caching. Despite output schema, the textual description is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 single optional parameter 'project' is not described at all. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not clarify what the parameter does or how it affects results.

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 retrieves all mandatory and forbidden rules, with a mention of direct SQL and caching. However, it does not differentiate from other memory tools like memory_search or memory_recall, which may also retrieve data.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as memory_search or memory_recall. The description provides no context for when rules should be fetched.

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