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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds real behavior: the query param ranks results best-match-first rather than filtering, and the category param narrows the list — ranking behavior is not derivable from annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then parameter behavior. Nothing is wasted; the field enumeration is brief and useful for scanning.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and both parameters and their behavior are covered. The only gap is routing to sibling tools, which is minor for a low-risk read-only listing tool with full annotation coverage.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that query is a relevance ranker (best matches first), not a filter, and gives concrete example terms. Category semantics are already well covered by the enum in the schema.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (GraphMake's designed infographic templates) and even enumerates the returned fields (id, name, category, size, intent). It is clearly distinguishable from get_template by being a catalog list, though it never explicitly names a sibling to contrast against.

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?

It explains the effect of each optional parameter (query ranks best matches, category filters) and gives example query terms, which implies when to use them. However it offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus get_template or render_template, and states no exclusions or prerequisites.

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