review_rule.apply

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

Annotations already indicate not read-only (readOnlyHint: false) and not destructive (destructiveHint: false). The description adds that it does not execute file changes, clarifying it modifies an overlay. However, missing details like required permissions, rate limits, or side effects beyond overlay.

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?

One sentence, extremely concise. Every word serves to communicate the core function and limitation. No wasted content.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks context about what an 'overlay' is, how this apply differs from preview, and the expected outcome. Given 3 parameters and 0% schema descriptions, the description is insufficient for full understanding.

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 has 3 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no explanation for their purpose or relationship (e.g., rule vs rule_id, job_id). Without any param semantics, the agent cannot know how to use these parameters correctly.

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 applies a review rule to the overlay only, distinguishing it from actions that execute file changes. The verb 'apply' and resource 'review rule' are specific, and the scope 'overlay only' differentiates it from sibling tools like apply.preview or full apply actions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as review_rule.preview or apply.preview. The description implies it is for overlay-only application, but does not state when this is appropriate or when to choose other tools.

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