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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint: true, and the description consistently describes a read-only list operation. It adds the tenant-scoped context, but does not disclose further behavioral details like pagination behavior or result ordering beyond what the schema already covers.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and adds the important tenant-scoping qualifier. There is no wasted or redundant wording.

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 fully documented parameters and a readOnly annotation, the description is nearly sufficient. An explicit statement about the return shape (an array of templates) would improve completeness, but it is reasonably implied by 'List'.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with tenant_id, limit, and cursor all already documented. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('List') and a distinct resource ('notification templates configured for a tenant'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_tenant_template or delete_tenant_template by describing the list scope.

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 gives clear context: this lists templates for a tenant. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus related tools such as get_tenant_template or list_journey_templates, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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