list_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. The verb 'List' makes it clear this is a read-only operation, and 'in the cluster' scopes the search domain. It does not detail output format or edge cases, but the output schema likely covers that, and no side effects are expected.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action 'List' and includes only essential scope details. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or 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?

As a parameterless list operation with an output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it states the action, resource, scope, and purpose ('for cloning'). No additional behavioral or return-value details are necessary given the simplicity and existing output schema.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema. The description correctly omits parameter details, and the baseline for 0-param tools is 4, which is appropriate here.

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 the specific verb 'List' and resource 'VM templates', and adds the scope 'in the cluster for cloning'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_snapshots or list_vms, and unambiguously states the tool's purpose.

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 context by mentioning 'available in the cluster for cloning', which tells the agent when to use this tool (when listing templates). It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the resource type is unique enough that clear context is provided without the need for exclusions.

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