List Gallery Templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only that these are ready-made designs intended to be copied, with no extra behavioral detail on pagination behavior or result shape.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the follow-up action.

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 read-only listing tool with a fully documented 8-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the intended next step well. A brief note on category-id sourcing or pagination would make it fully self-sufficient, but nothing critical is missing.

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% and all 8 parameters (cursors, limit, search, and the four comma-separated id filters) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (Browse) and resource (Arsel's gallery of ready-made email designs), which distinguishes it from the sibling list-templates that covers the organization's own templates. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with list-templates/get-gallery-template, but the 'gallery' framing plus the named follow-up tool makes the role clear.

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 points to the natural next action (copy-gallery-template), which implies a browse-then-copy workflow, but gives no explicit when-to-use versus list-templates or when-not guidance, and does not mention that filter ids must come from list-gallery-categories (that fact lives only in the schema).

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