list_email_templatesList reusable email templates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | One row per template — id, name, subject, the message body, its CTA button, and whether it is the account default. | |
| meta | No | Page, limit and total row count. | |
| success | Yes | True when the call succeeded. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / properties / meta / descriptionPrevious value: -"Pagination for the list — page, limit and the total row count."New value: +"Page, limit and total row count."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / limit / descriptionPrevious value: -"Maximum rows per page."New value: +"Max rows per page."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / page / descriptionPrevious value: -"Zero-based index of the page returned."New value: +"Page index, zero-based."Output schema / properties / meta / properties / total / descriptionPrevious value: -"Total rows matching the query across all pages."New value: +"Total rows matching the query."Output schema / properties / success / descriptionPrevious value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the core listing behavior but no further context like ordering, pagination, or whether archived/inactive templates are included. For a zero-parameter list with an output schema, this is minimal but acceptable.
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 five-word sentence that immediately conveys the verb and the resource. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, making it appropriately concise for a simple list operation.
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 read-only, zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states the operation and resource, and the annotations cover safety. It is slightly sparse on how this tool relates to sibling tools like list_templates, but nothing critical is missing for invoking 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 input schema contains zero properties, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The description provides no parameter details, but none are needed; this matches the baseline for zero-parameter tools.
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 operation ('List') and the specific resource ('reusable email templates'), making the tool's purpose easy to identify. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like list_templates or list_email_senders, but the resource name is specific enough to avoid major confusion.
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 intended usage is only implied: an agent would use this when it needs to see available email templates. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as list_templates or list_email_senders, but the zero-parameter, read-only nature makes selection reasonably straightforward.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.