quiz_video_list_templatesList the caller's saved custom templates (and optionally public ones). Templates are reusable scene-based designs that can be applied to many quizzes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| includePublic | No | Include public templates in addition to your own. Default true. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context by specifying that it returns the caller's own templates unless public ones are included. This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies the scope of the listing.
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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. No extraneous information.
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 tool with read-only annotation and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what it lists and what templates are. Missing details about output format or pagination are not critical, but could be more explicit.
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 only 33%, with only includePublic described. The description mentions 'optionally public ones' which aligns with includePublic, but does not add meaning for page or limit parameters. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.
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 the caller's saved custom templates, with an optional inclusion of public ones. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (custom templates), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_template, update_template, and apply_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 provides context by explaining what templates are, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_template or apply_template. Usage is implied but not clearly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool targets a distinct resource and action (create/get/list/update/delete per entity). Overlapping pairs like get_render vs download_render are clearly differentiated by their purpose, and generate_quiz vs create_quiz serve different creation modes. There is no ambiguity between tools.
The vast majority of tools follow a consistent 'quiz_video_<verb>_<noun>' pattern in snake_case. The only deviation is the three discovery tools (get_api_catalog, get_llms_txt, get_openapi_spec) which omit the 'quiz_video_' prefix, though they still use a clear verb_noun structure.
With 30 tools, the server is on the heavier side and exceeds the typical 15-tool guideline. However, the count is justified by the breadth of resources covered (quizzes, questions, hooks, templates, flashcard decks, renders, music, account) and each tool has a distinct role, so the size feels appropriate for a comprehensive API surface.
The server covers full CRUD for most core resources (quizzes, templates, flashcard decks, hooks) and add/list for questions. Minor gaps include no individual question update/delete and no direct render deletion, but these are not critical and the main workflows (create → view → render → download) are fully covered.