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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that templates are composed only of MIAN sections/components and carry a default noodle and pages, giving structural context beyond the name. However it says nothing about permissions, whether the list is paginated/complete, or freshness of the catalog.

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 front-loads the key fact (whole multi-page websites) before the category enumeration. The parenthetical category list is long but serves selection value by signaling coverage breadth.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description should convey what comes back. It hints at structure (default noodle, pages) but does not say the response is a catalog of all available templates or how they are identified for a subsequent get_template call.

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 has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. Baseline 4 applies; the description neither misleads nor duplicates any schema field.

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 characterizes the resource precisely: whole multi-page websites built from MIAN sections and components, enumerating ten template categories (SaaS, docs, restaurant, magazine, etc.). Combined with the name 'list_templates' and the singular sibling 'get_template', an agent can distinguish this from component/noodle-level tools, though the description itself never states the verb 'list'.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says whether to call this before plan_site, instead of get_template, or how it relates to list_noodles and list_components. The only implicit cue is the word 'whole', which suggests site-level rather than section-level lookup, but that is left for the agent to infer.

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