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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail: snapshots are immutable, results are newest first, it spends no quota, requires a specific API scope, and describes the no-key error behavior. This goes well beyond the structured 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?

Every sentence serves a purpose: the first defines the output, the second links to related tools, the third clarifies what is excluded, the fourth scopes accessibility, and the last covers security and error response. It is dense but not bloated.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage context: output format, ordering, related tool alternatives, scope, authentication, and error behavior. It is fully self-contained.

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 schema already describes templateId as 'Template UUID or slug', and the description reinforces this by noting it works on system and public templates as well as your own. This adds useful context beyond the schema, though the core parameter semantic is already well covered.

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 explicitly states the tool lists a template's immutable version snapshots, newest first, with a specific output shape. It also distinguishes itself from get_template_version by noting bodies are not included, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly explains the use case: the version numbers here are what publish_template and rollback_template accept. It also explicitly directs users to call get_template_version when they need a snapshot's body, and mentions the tool works on system and public templates, providing clear contextual guidance.

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