list_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the behavioral scope of including both built-in and user-defined templates. There is no mention of additional behavioral traits like pagination or default sorting, but the read-only nature is clear and consistent.

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: 'List built-in and user-defined templates'. It contains no filler, no redundancy, and succinctly communicates the core purpose.

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, the read-only annotation, and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. However, it does not explicitly mention the optional filter parameters or the fact that no filters return all templates, though the schema covers this.

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%, so the parameters (tags, query, source) are fully described in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional parameter-level meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('templates'), with clear scoping to 'built-in and user-defined' categories. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_variables and list_modules, making the operation unambiguous.

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 (when you want to list templates) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or when alternatives like get_template_info or load_template might be more appropriate. No alternatives are mentioned, which limits the guidance.

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