list_prompts

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

No annotations provided; description carries the full burden. Describes listing behavior, returned fields, filtering, limit, and sort order. Implicitly read-only (listing templates), but does not explicitly state no side effects or permission requirements. Still, the behavior is well-covered for a list operation.

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?

Single paragraph with 3 well-structured sentences. Front-loaded with purpose, then filtering details, then limit/sort info. Every sentence adds necessary information; no redundancy or fluff.

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 list tool with 3 optional params, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, filters, limit, sort order, returned fields, and its role in the dashboard. No critical gaps.

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 description coverage is 100% (all 3 parameters documented). Description adds value by explaining how to use filters (e.g., label example 'production'), that name fetches all versions, and adds context about sort order and limit. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists prompt templates, enumerates included fields (id/name/version/template/variables/labels/description/createdAt), and notes it is the main path for an AI agent to read prompts, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_prompt or create_prompt.

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?

Provides clear usage context: filtering by label or name, with example values and exact match semantics. Also specifies limit (up to 200) and sort order (name ASC + created_at DESC). Does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives, but gives sufficient guidance for typical use.

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