get_project_templates

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool lists templates, which is a read-only operation. No additional behavior (e.g., authentication, rate limits) is disclosed, but for a simple list tool, this is adequate and not misleading.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and front-loads the core action.

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?

While adequate for a simple tool, the description lacks details about the return value format (e.g., what properties each template has) since there is no output schema. It is minimally complete but could benefit from specifying the output structure.

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 the baseline score is 4 per rubric guidance. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by indicating the purpose and context of the returned data (templates for 'create_project').

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 the resource ('all available project templates'), and specifies the context ('that can be used with create_project'). This directly distinguishes it from siblings like 'create_project' or 'get_export_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?

The description implies that this tool is used before calling 'create_project' to see available templates. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it, alternatives (e.g., 'create_project_from_template' also uses templates but doesn't list them), or prerequisites. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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