Template List

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the parent/variant structural concept, which is genuinely useful, but it discloses nothing about rate limits, pagination behavior, or ordering beyond what annotations and schema already provide.

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 the core action and free of padding. The second sentence is compact and earns its place by introducing the parent/variant model.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage, the core is present, but with no output schema the description could have said what a result row contains or noted that results are paginated. It is adequate but leaves minor gaps an agent would have to discover at runtime.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The 'language variants that reference it as parent' sentence does add conceptual meaning to hasParentId, but only marginally beyond the schema's own explanation.

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 states a specific verb pair (list/search) and resource (reply templates of an organization), so an agent immediately knows this is a collection-retrieval tool. It distinguishes itself functionally from template_get/create/update/delete without naming them, which keeps it at a solid 4 rather than a 5.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of excluding template_get or of prerequisites. The parent/variant note gives incidental domain context, but nothing tells the agent when this tool is the right choice versus its siblings.

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