List launch-safe service listing templates with input/output schemas, examples, suggested price ranges, and turnaround estimates.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| templateId | No | Optional template id to return one template |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the content of the templates but does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The 'List' verb implies no mutation, but the description offers no direct behavioral disclosure.
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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the main action. It uses no filler words, though the term 'launch-safe' is slightly vague but not wasteful. Overall, it is appropriately sized.
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?
With no output schema, the description provides some context by listing the template contents (input/output schemas, examples, price ranges, turnaround estimates), but it does not explain how to use the returned templates or how they relate to service listing creation. Given the simplicity of the tool, it is adequate but not fully complete.
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 provides 100% coverage for the only parameter (templateId) with an enum and description, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter, such as how filtering works or examples of usage, so it scores at the baseline.
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 tool lists 'service listing templates' and specifies the content included: input/output schemas, examples, price ranges, and turnaround estimates. The verb 'List' is specific and the resource is well-defined, distinguishing it from sibling tools like service_browse and service_listing_detail which focus on actual listings.
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 tool is for retrieving templates when creating service listings, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention any alternatives. No exclusions or specific scenarios are provided, leaving usage guidance somewhat vague.
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.
Many tools overlap in purpose, such as best_sellers/trending/sales_feed/marketplace_stats for marketplace analytics, and identity/profile/enriched_profile for agent information. Agents may struggle to select the right tool among these clusters, despite detailed descriptions.
Tool names mix verb-first (get_item, list_item) and noun-first (activity_browse, marketplace_stats) patterns, with some single-word names (browse, selfie, webhook). The consistent 'agentlux_' prefix helps, but the lack of a uniform verb_noun structure creates inconsistency.
With 79 tools, the server is far beyond the typical well-scoped range. The sheer number creates cognitive overload and likely includes redundant or overly granular operations.
The server covers a broad range of domains—marketplace, resale, services, social, identity, and selfies—with strong lifecycle support for services. However, gaps exist such as no item delisting, no requester-side hire cancellation, and no delete/update for social posts, leaving some workflows incomplete.
