Find popular Zap templates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns templates with step chains and one-click create links, and that input comes from app slugs. It does not mention sorting, pagination, or failure modes, but the read-style behavior is reasonably clear.

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?

A single well-structured sentence front-loads the purpose, adds a motivating question, and packs in the key details about input format and output contents without waste.

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 two-parameter lookup with full schema coverage, the description provides enough context about what is returned. It lacks explicit notes on default limit behavior or result ordering, but these are minor for this tool's 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents apps and limit with defaults and ranges. The description adds a cross-reference to search_apps and example app pairs, but does not meaningfully expand beyond 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 a specific action — returning popular, ready-made Zap templates — and identifies the input as app slugs from search_apps. It clearly distinguishes this from searching apps by focusing on templates with step chains and one-click create links.

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 the workflow: first use search_apps to get app slugs, then use this tool to find templates for those apps. It does not explicitly say when not to use it, but the single sibling's purpose is clear enough to avoid confusion.

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