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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior: it returns summary text and preview image URLs, and it works without an API key, giving the agent practical expectations without contradicting the 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?

Two sentences carry all essential information with no redundancy. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by usage conditions and a practical auth note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 parameterless listing tool with strong read-only annotations, this description is complete. It covers what the tool does, what the output contains, when to use it, and the absence of an API key requirement. Nothing needed for correct invocation 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 takes zero parameters and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there is little for the description to add about parameters. It still contributes by describing the result payload (summary and preview URL), which helps the agent understand what the tool returns despite the absence of an output schema.

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 the specific verb 'List' and names a precise resource: Pressa's public document templates, including categories. It also states what each listing contains (one-line summary and preview image URL), which clearly distinguishes this from siblings like get_public_template or render_public_template.

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 explicitly gives the condition for use: when the user wants one of these documents and has no layout of their own, or asks to see designs to choose from. It stops short of naming alternatives like get_public_template, so it lacks an explicit when-not or alternative routing, but the usage context is clear.

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