list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists available components, without mentioning return format, pagination, whether it returns metadata or full code, or any side effects. Minimal disclosure beyond the core action.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and scope, then provides a parenthetical enumeration of examples. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional param, no annotations, no output schema). The description adequately states purpose and gives examples, but it does not describe the return structure, ordering, or any filtering nuance beyond the schema's category list. For a listing tool this is a modest gap, but a complete agent might need more detail about the output.

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% for the 'category' parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by enumerating concrete component types (Navbars, Heroes, Tabs, etc.) that implicitly map to category values, giving an agent a better understanding of what each category likely includes.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('componentes de código React 19 + Tailwind + Framer Motion/GSAP'), and enumerates example component types (Navbars, Heroes, Bentos, etc.). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_template (fetch one) and list_design_systems (design systems).

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 verb 'Lista' implies its usage (when you want to list all components), and the schema documents the optional category filter. However, the description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like search_vault, nor does it state when not to use it. 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.