testmo_list_templates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' clearly indicates a read-only operation, and it adds useful context about the purpose of the returned templates (template_id and custom_* fields). However, it does not explicitly state lack of side effects or describe response format, but for a simple list tool this is sufficient.

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 concise, consisting of two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value without 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?

For a simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it states what is returned (templates), why it is needed (template_id and custom_* fields), and the required context (project). Minor missing details like where to obtain project_id are secondary.

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% (project_id described as 'Project ID'). The description reinforces that templates are for a project, but adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameter.

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 tool lists case templates for a project, using the specific verb 'List' plus resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying 'case templates' and 'project', and even explains its relation to creating cases via template_id.

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 provides clear usage context: it is needed for template_id when creating cases and to know which custom_* fields a template accepts. This implies the appropriate time to use it (before creating cases) and gives value, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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