list_macro_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=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only that results carry ids and values, which is largely return-value information already covered by the output schema. No pagination, ordering, or account-scoping behavior is 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?

A single short clause with no padding or redundancy, and the resource identity is front-loaded. It is terse rather than bloated, though the terseness shades into under-specification.

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?

Annotations cover safety and an output schema covers the return shape, so the missing pieces are narrower than they first appear. Still, for a tool sitting among get_macro_targets, get_daily_macro_targets, and create/delete_macro_template siblings, the definition gives no cue about what these templates are or when listing them is the right move.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a no-param tool applies. No parameter claims are made or needed.

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 fragment 'Saved macro target templates, with their ids and values' identifies the resource but supplies no verb, so the listing action must be inferred from the tool name alone. It also does not distinguish this from siblings such as get_macro_targets or get_daily_macro_targets, which plausibly return overlapping data.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no statement of the condition that selects this tool over get_macro_targets or get_daily_macro_targets. The agent must guess the boundary from names alone.

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