parse_rule

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

Describes return of AST or parse errors and support for multi-document. No annotations, so description carries burden; however, does not explicitly state read-only or idempotent nature.

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?

Two sentences: first covers purpose and output, second covers parameters. No extraneous information, front-loaded.

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?

Adequate for a simple parse tool with two parameters; explains inputs, outputs, and error handling. Without output schema, could detail return format more, but sufficient for invocation.

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 100%, description adds mutual exclusivity and path resolution behavior beyond schema descriptions, providing useful context.

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?

Clearly states verb 'parse', resource 'Sigma YAML', and output 'structured AST as JSON' or parse errors. Differentiates from siblings like parse_condition and convert_rules.

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?

Specifies input modes (inline yaml or file path) but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives. Context from sibling tools implies differentiation.

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