list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It makes clear the tool reads stored templates and surfaces their variable requirements, implying a non-mutating list operation. However, it does not explicitly state side-effect-free behavior or what payload to expect beyond templates and variables.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states exactly what the tool does, and the second adds useful context about why templates matter without bloating the description.

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 no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the main return concept: templates and their variables. It does not mention pagination or ordering, but that is not critical for this simple operation.

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 parameter semantics are not a concern. The schema coverage is 100% and the description does not need to explain any inputs; baseline 4 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('stored email templates'), and adds a meaningful qualifier: it also returns the variables each template needs. This clearly distinguishes it from related template tools like render_template and send_template_email.

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 gives general advice to prefer templates over hand-composed HTML for sending, which implies the value of template usage but does not explicitly say when to call list_templates versus a sibling like render_template or send_template_email. The guidance is present but indirect.

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