list_grocery_order_templates

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

The description is a simple declarative statement; it clearly implies a read-only listing operation, but without annotations it does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as sorting, pagination, or whether the list includes archived templates. For such a simple tool, the verb 'List' is adequate, but there is no extra context.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently states the action and resource.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects, output schema present), the description fully covers what the agent needs to know to invoke it. It clearly identifies what is being listed and distinguishes it from related tools.

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 no parameters, so there is no parameter ambiguity. The description adds domain context ('reusable') but there is nothing to explain; baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4.

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' plus a clear resource ('reusable grocery order templates') and scope ('saved on this service'). This distinguishes it from sibling creation/search/handoff tools.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and sibling list imply it is the standard way to list templates, the description does not explicitly state a preferred use case or contrast with tools like create_grocery_order_template or search_grocery_products.

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