killbottleneck-mcp

Official

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

list_rule_templates

Retrieve the instance-wide library of rule templates to inspect trigger, condition, and action patterns, then use them to create an independent rule copy on a target map.

Instructions

List the instance-wide library of rule templates (shape of a rule without a map or node scope). To use one, read it and call create_rule on the target map with its trigger/conditions/actions — the created rule is an independent copy.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_rule_templates"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.1Nov 9, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedv0.33.2-betaAug 17, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does meaningful work: it discloses the instance-wide scope, that templates carry no map or node binding, and critically that a rule created from a template is an independent copy rather than a live reference. It does not state read-only-ness explicitly or discuss permissions/pagination, which keeps it out of 5 territory.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, both load-bearing: the first establishes identity and scope, the second establishes the follow-up workflow and the copy semantics. The scope qualifier is front-loaded and there is no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter list operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, and the downstream action well. It leaves some ambiguity about what the listed templates actually contain and whether this library includes user-saved templates from save_rule_template, which an agent might reasonably wonder about before calling.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. No misleading parameter language is present.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb (List) and resource (rule templates), then pins the scope as 'instance-wide' and parenthetically defines what a template is: 'shape of a rule without a map or node scope.' That scope/definition contrast is what separates it from list_rules, which operates on an actual map or node, so an agent can pick correctly without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives concrete forward guidance: read a template, then call create_rule on the target map with its trigger/conditions/actions, which tells the agent this is a discovery step, not a terminal call. It stops short of an explicit exclusion clause (e.g. 'use list_rules to see rules already on a map'), so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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