List Project Templates

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is safe. The description adds value by explaining pagination behavior: 'Returns a paginated JSON array... Use page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata.' No contradictions.

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 three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: action, usage, pagination details, and required parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 lack of output schema, the description covers return format ('paginated JSON array of Project records') and metadata. Combined with good annotations and full schema coverage, it provides complete context for the agent to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds meaning beyond schema by highlighting that 'company_id' is required and explaining that 'page' and 'per_page' control pagination, providing context not in 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 states 'Return a list of Project Templates that are available to utilize for Project creation,' clearly specifying the verb (list), resource (project templates), and purpose (for project creation). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_project_checklist_templates' by focusing on project 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 provides clear usage context: 'Use this to enumerate Project records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It also notes the required parameter 'company_id.' While it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it, the purpose is well-defined.

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