gh_template_list

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description reveals that 'available=False' indicates missing binaries and that loading such templates will fail. This adds valuable behavioral insight not captured by annotations.

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: the first clearly states the purpose, and the second adds essential nuance. No unnecessary words, front-loaded.

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 it is a read-only list tool with an output schema, the description covers the key behavior. It could be slightly more complete by hinting at the relationship to other template tools or the structure of parameter contracts, but it is largely adequate.

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 input schema has one required 'args' parameter (empty object), but the description does not clarify that no actual parameters are needed. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain the parameter's purpose or that it is a no-op wrapper.

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 the tool's action ('List bundled Grasshopper templates') and the output includes 'parameter contracts', distinguishing it from siblings like gh_load_template or gh_run_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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., gh_component_list, gh_plugin_list) or when not to use it. The description only explains the 'available=False' semantic but lacks usage context.

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