panorama_get_templates

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

The read-only and non-destructive behavior is already declared in annotations; the description adds only the config path '/config/.../template'. No additional behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions, or limits are disclosed.

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 short and front-loaded with the read-only marker and primary action. The config path adds useful precision without unnecessary filler.

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 read-only list operation with one optional parameter, the description and schema together provide enough to select and invoke the tool. The lack of an output schema leaves minor ambiguity about the exact return shape, but the core behavior is clear.

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%, so the optional firewall parameter is fully documented in structured form. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but not contributive.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Retrieves all templates configured in Panorama.' It identifies scope and differentiates from device-level configs, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the adjacent panorama_get_template_stacks tool.

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 no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternative template-related getters. The optional firewall parameter's conditional requirement is documented in the schema, but the prose does not help an agent choose between this and sibling tools.

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