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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the purpose ('List available prompt templates') and adds a version note, but does not disclose filtering semantics, ordering, pagination, output shape, or any access considerations. This is minimal beyond the name itself.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence is the core functional statement, and the version note is brief and unobtrusive. It is appropriately sized for its simplicity.

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 tool has four optional parameters, an output schema, and multiple sibling tools, but the description is extremely sparse. It fails to clarify how this listing tool relates to get_prompt_template or export_prompt_template, does not mention return behavior, and gives no context about the unified prompt templates feature beyond a version string. This is incomplete for effective agent selection.

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 already documents three of four parameters (tags, agent_id, category) with descriptions, giving 75% coverage. The description only gestures at 'optional filtering' without elaborating on specific parameters, and user_uuid remains undocumented. The schema does the main work, so the description adds little semantic value.

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 available prompt templates with optional filtering. The verb 'List' plus the resource 'prompt templates' precisely defines the operation, and the presence of sibling tools like get_prompt_template and export_prompt_template makes the distinguishing scope evident.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_prompt_template is for retrieving a single template or that export_prompt_template is for exporting, so the agent receives no explicit decision-making support.

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