picus_list_templates

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses pagination via limit/offset, and that returned data includes threat_count, agent_types, and content_updated_at. However, does not mention read-only nature or any effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by filter details and output fields. Every sentence is informative and no wasted words.

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 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the tool's purpose, all parameters, filtering behavior, pagination, and output fields. Highly complete for a listing tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates by explaining each parameter: category_name with examples, content_type with allowed values, and limit/offset for pagination. Provides meaningful guidance beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'threat templates', and distinguishes between dynamic and static templates. The description also mentions filters, making the purpose specific and differentiating from sibling tools like 'picus_get_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?

Implies when to use (when listing templates) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools, such as 'picus_get_template' for a single template. No exclusions or context explained.

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