List Beam's detection rules

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses 'Read-only, runs entirely locally,' which informs the agent about side effects and privacy. It does not describe return format or potential empty results, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.

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 primary action and grouping detail, followed by a use-case and behavioral note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description covers what the tool does, what it returns (grouped rules), why to use it (before relying on scan results), and its operational characteristics (read-only, local). For a parameterless list tool with no output schema, this is complete and leaves no critical gaps.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and the empty schema leaves nothing ambiguous. No additional parameter information is required.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'every active Beam detection rule', with explicit grouping by category (built-in, custom, cross-event). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like beam_scan_content and beam_scan_path, which perform scans, not rule listing.

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?

It provides context: 'Use this to know what patterns Beam actually looks for before relying on a scan result.' This implies when to invoke the tool, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. Still, the guidance is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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