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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description only needs to add context beyond that. It usefully explains that templates are reusable task graphs and public reference content, not customer data. This adds meaningful behavioral scope without contradicting the annotations.

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 two focused sentences. The first sentence conveys the core action and expected output fields, while the second adds valuable context about what templates are and what they are not. There is no filler or repetition of schema or annotation data.

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 parameterless list tool with a provided output schema and safety annotations, the description is complete. It identifies the resource, the scope (public reference content), and the distinction from customer live data, giving an agent enough to invoke it correctly.

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 and the input schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation burden exists.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('Kanbai's public project templates'), and the return content ('name, description, task count'). It also distinguishes this tool from customer-data tools by emphasizing these are public reference templates, not live project data. This clearly separates it from siblings like kanbai_list_sops and kanbai_get_template.

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 provides clear context: this lists reusable public templates, not customer live project data, which tells an agent when it is appropriate to use. It does not explicitly name alternatives like 'use kanbai_get_template for a single template's full details,' but the context is strong enough to guide selection among siblings.

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