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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful context that templates define signer keys and that a template uuid is returned, but it does not disclose details like pagination, sorting, or the full set of fields returned. For a simple list operation, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted text. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by actionable workflow guidance, and each sentence contributes a distinct piece of information. Nothing is redundant or tangential.

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 is simple (zero params, read-only), and the description covers what the agent needs: what the list contains, why it matters, when to call it, and how to use the result. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the explicit mention of the template uuid and the reference to `get_document` for further detail.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema already covers everything (100% coverage). The description adds meaning about the return value's importance (the template uuid needed for `send_from_template`), which helps the agent understand what to extract from the result. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools 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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource: 'reusable document templates in this GoodSign account.' It also distinguishes the tool from siblings by naming downstream tools (`send_from_template`, `get_document`) and explaining the unique role of this list operation.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Call this first whenever the user wants to send a document.' It explains why this tool must precede `send_from_template` (needs a template uuid) and points to `get_document` as the follow-up to inspect signer keys. This gives the agent a clear decision flow.

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