List policy rules

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It notes ordering (highest priority first) and that built-in defaults also apply, but does not disclose permissions, side effects, return format, or pagination. Limited but not absent.

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, front-loaded with the main action and ordering. Every word serves a purpose with no waste.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers what is listed (explicit rules), ordering, and the existence of defaults. Could additionally explain the scope of policies, but not necessary for basic usage.

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 has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since none exist.

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 lists explicit policy rules with ordering (highest priority first), and explicitly distinguishes from built-in defaults. This is a specific verb and resource that differentiates it from other list tools among siblings.

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 implies usage for viewing explicit rules, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like dashclaw_policies_list or list_audit_log. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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