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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive, and the description's 'List' wording is consistent with that. The description adds little behavioral context beyond optional filtering/pagination, but no hidden side effects are implied and there is no contradiction.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition of the schema. It communicates the resource, operation, and key capabilities efficiently.

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?

The rich schema, output schema, and read-only annotations cover most invocation needs, so the minimal description is largely sufficient. It only lacks explicit routing to closely related sibling tools, which prevents a top score.

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?

All eight parameters are fully described in the input schema, including enums and explanatory text, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 resource 'report templates', and mentions optional filtering and pagination. This makes the operation clear and distinguishes it from get_template, though it does not explicitly contrast any sibling tool.

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 implies this is the general listing endpoint for templates, but it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives such as get_template or list_reports. The intended use must be inferred from the name and schema.

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