origin_list_graph_templates

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

Without annotations, the description offers minimal behavioral insight. It does not disclose what happens when template_dir is null (e.g., defaults), whether the operation is read-only, or the scope of templates listed. This leaves key behavior undisclosed.

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 a single concise sentence, but it sacrifices important detail for brevity. It could be expanded slightly to include parameter context without becoming verbose.

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 the tool has an output schema, return values are not required in the description. However, the description fails to mention the default directory, scope of templates, or what 'optional template files' means, leaving the tool's context incomplete for an agent.

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 schema has 0% parameter description coverage. The description mentions 'in a directory' linking to template_dir, but does not explain default behavior, accepted directory format, or what 'optional template files' are. The description adds only a basic hint beyond the schema.

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 action ('List') and resource ('common graph template names and optional template files'). It distinguishes from sibling tools that plot or modify graphs, but the term 'common' is slightly ambiguous as it may imply a predefined set rather than all available templates.

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 like origin_batch_plot_from_template or origin_list_project. The description does not specify prerequisites or typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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