list_image_prompt_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. It explicitly states '系统级只读' (system-level read-only) and '不会触发生图' (does not trigger image generation), which are valuable behavioral guarantees beyond the tool's name.

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?

Three short sentences, each providing unique information: scope, content, filter option, and side-effect guarantee. Zero filler.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, content, filtering, and safety. No output schema is needed because the description already mentions what is returned (prompt and preview image).

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 already describes slug at 100% coverage, but the description adds a more user-friendly phrasing '可选 slug 过滤单条', reinforcing its optionality and filtering behavior, which is somewhat redundant but still helps.

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 '列出' (list) with a clear resource '生图提示词模板' (image prompt templates), and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on template listing rather than reading shares or product docs.

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 mentions the optional slug filter for narrowing to a single template, which gives context for when to pass parameters. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the purpose is distinct enough to imply usage.

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