list_templates

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral weight. It does disclose the return content ('templates ... with their field lists'), which is the main behavioral detail for a read operation. It says nothing about pagination, permissions, or whether the category argument narrows results, leaving notable gaps for an unannotated tool.

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 compact sentences with no filler; the resource definition is front-loaded and the cross-tool hint follows. Both sentences carry information, though the second sentence is the one doing most of the routing work.

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 one-optional-param list tool with neither annotations nor an output schema, the description covers what comes back and the intended follow-on call to create_form. Missing pieces are minor: no statement that the category filter is optional and no pagination note.

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 single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the schema alone does not explain it. The description's examples ('contact, feedback, registration') map directly onto enum values, giving the agent partial semantics for the category filter, but it never says the parameter is an optional category filter or what happens when it is omitted.

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 names the resource precisely ('Form templates... with their field lists') and gives representative categories, so an agent knows this returns template definitions rather than submissions or forms. However, it never uses an explicit list verb and gives no differentiation from the sibling list_forms, so an agent must infer which of the two list tools it wants.

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?

It supplies a workflow hint ('Pass a template slug to create_form to start from one') that tells the agent what to do after calling this tool. It does not state when to choose this over list_forms or whether the category filter is required, so usage is only implied.

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