list_archive_rules

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the nuance that the table filter is an exact match, but says nothing about pagination behavior despite a limit parameter, nor about result ordering or size.

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 zero filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves the parameter gap unaddressed rather than being an asset.

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 read-only list tool with two optional params and no output schema, this is minimally sufficient to call correctly. But the undocumented limit parameter and absent return-shape hints leave the agent guessing about result volume.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It clarifies the table parameter as an exact-match filter, but the limit parameter is never mentioned (default? max?), leaving half the parameters undocumented in both schema and prose.

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 and resource ("List archive rules") and adds the filter scope. The resource name is distinct from nearby siblings like list_cleanup_rules and list_data_management_policies, but the description never names those siblings to disambiguate which rule type to fetch.

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?

Only implicitly guides usage through "optionally for one exact table" — it says you may filter, not when to filter or which alternative tool to pick (create_archive_rule, set_archive_rule_active, list_cleanup_rules). No when-not guidance at all.

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