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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it discloses the key behavioral constraint: authentication is required and start_login won't unlock it. The verb "Get" implies a read-only operation, and no side effects are suggested. Minor gaps like error behavior are not covered, but the essential access-dependent behavior is transparent.

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 definition is compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the tool's purpose, and the second paragraph gives the required access steps. Every sentence adds relevant information without repetition or fluff.

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 zero-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the necessary context: what is returned (all default message templates), their role, and the prerequisite to call it successfully. No important context is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameter meaning because there are none to document.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Get all default message templates," and further clarifies these are "built-in templates used when no custom template is set." This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like get_template and list_templates by scoping it to defaults.

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 provides concrete invocation context: a Proof account is required, the client must be authenticated, and the tool should be called again after authentication. It also warns that start_login does not open this tool. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the access conditions and exclusion are actionable.

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