geometry_nodes_templates

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation, and the description consistently says 'List' rather than a mutating verb. It adds useful details beyond the annotation by specifying the fixed count ('8 curated templates') and example contents, but it does not describe return format or further behavior.

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 sentence with no filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and the parenthetical examples efficiently convey the template categories.

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 has no parameters, read-only annotations, and a simple listing purpose, the description is largely complete. The only minor gap is that it does not describe the output shape, but for a plain list tool this is easy to infer and not a meaningful obstacle.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description has no obligation to explain parameters. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds relevant content context without needing parameter details.

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 a clear verb ('List') with a specific resource ('8 curated Geometry Nodes templates') and concrete examples. This distinguishes it from sibling geometry node tools like geometry_nodes_create, geometry_nodes_add_node, geometry_nodes_link, and geometry_nodes_set_param, which are all mutating operations.

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 implies the tool is for browsing available templates before creating or editing geometry nodes, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. Since there is no sibling that lists templates, the usage context is inferred rather than clearly guided.

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