snap_list_dynamic_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description's 'read-only' merely restates that. It adds useful context that the returned ids feed creative creation, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result volume, or whether all templates are returned in one page.

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?

Two short sentences: identity plus domain gloss first, then the actionable id reuse. No filler, no restatement of the name, and the most useful detail (id usage) is not buried.

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 param and no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, and the key output artifact (ids usable elsewhere). Only pagination/result-set expectations are unaddressed, which is a minor gap at this complexity.

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 single parameter (limit) is never mentioned in the description, but the schema fully constrains it with type, default 50, and a 1-200 range, so the meaning is self-evident. Schema description coverage is 0%, which prevents a higher score, but little meaning is actually missing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the ad account's dynamic templates') and immediately clarifies what a dynamic template is ('how products are laid out in catalog ads'). An agent can distinguish it from snap_create_dynamic_template and snap_list_catalogs without opening the schema.

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?

Adds a concrete downstream usage rule: take the returned id and pass it as dynamic_template_id to snap_create_creative, which is genuinely action-guiding. It does not explicitly say when to prefer this over sibling list tools (e.g., snap_list_catalogs), so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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