List transaction templates

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

No annotations are present, so the description must compensate. It only conveys the basic action without disclosing default behavior when template_type is omitted, return format, ordering, or pagination, leaving significant behavioral traits unclear.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value, making it highly concise for a tool with one simple parameter.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action but omits details about default behavior and output structure, which are expected for a complete description.

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 description's 'normal or scheduled' maps to the enum values 'normal' and 'schedule', providing partial semantic context. However, it is ambiguous whether the parameter filters or both types are listed by default, and it does not explicitly reference the parameter name.

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 action (List) and the resource (transaction templates), and distinguishes between 'normal or scheduled' templates, which differentiates it from sibling tools like list_accounts, list_tags, and manage_template.

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 implies usage for retrieving templates, optionally filtered by type. It provides clear context but does not explicitly exclude use cases or mention manage_template for modifications, so it stops short of a 5.

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