List Available Templates

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds the scope 'available' and the fact that contents are included, but provides no additional behavioral context such as whether results are ordered, limited, or derived from the current drawing. This is adequate given the annotation coverage, though not especially rich.

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 filler. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose and scope.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint annotation, this description is complete. An agent can correctly determine what the tool does and what it returns without needing additional explanation.

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, so the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. The schema fully documents the empty parameter set, and the baseline of 4 for parameterless tools 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('List'), a precise resource ('all available layer templates'), and the scope of the result ('their contents'). This distinguishes it from related siblings like template_apply_layers, which performs an action rather than a read-only listing.

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 makes the tool's purpose clear and implies it should be used when an agent needs to inspect available layer templates. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as template_apply_layers or layer_list, leaving the usage context mostly implicit.

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