get_baseline_rules

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses read-only behavior, local YAML parsing, and error handling for unknown IDs. It clearly states no database or network access, providing complete transparency.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded with [READ], but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate sections). However, it contains all necessary information without unnecessary 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?

Given the simple tool (one parameter, no nested objects), the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, return format, usage guidance, and behavior. No gaps remain.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds rich meaning: specifies exact requirement (as returned by list_baselines), provides an example, and explains error behavior. Compensates fully for missing schema descriptions.

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 returns every rule in one compliance baseline, with a specific verb 'Return' and resource 'rules of a baseline'. It distinguishes from siblings by advising use after list_baselines and contrasting with list_violations.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('after list_baselines to preview what scan_target will check') and when not to ('use list_violations for actual scan findings'). Also mentions error handling for unknown IDs.

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