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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' makes the read-only, non-destructive behavior clear, and all allowed filter values are disclosed. However, it does not describe the return format or any pagination behavior, which would further enhance 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every element adds value: the action, the resource, and the explicit filter values.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the action and filter values. It could further specify the default behavior when no occasion is provided (implied but not stated) or whether the result is sorted, but these are minor gaps for this simplicity level.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the parameter 'occasion'. It fully compensates by enumerating all acceptable values in parentheses, providing meaning that the bare string schema (with default '') lacks. This is a strong addition.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the clear resource 'card templates' and an optional filter by occasion. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_offers and get_phrases, and the parenthetical list of occasions adds specificity.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool (to list templates) and provides the valid occasion filter values, which gives practical usage context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion cases, but sibling tools are clearly different in purpose.

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