list_mnm_rules

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior, account-scope details beyond the schema, or any other behavioral traits.

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 a single sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 list operation with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool. Minor gaps remain around pagination and the relationship to get_mnm_rule and get_mnm_config.

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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter, account_id, is already documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about how account_id is used beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List Magic Network Monitoring rules.' This clearly identifies the operation and distinguishes it from the singular get_mnm_rule and related config tools, though it does not explicitly call out sibling differences.

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?

There is no guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_mnm_rule or get_mnm_config. The description only states the action and resource, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.

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