List Templates

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

The description discloses important behaviors beyond annotations: cursor-based pagination, default limit, the fact that templates with versioning disabled have id=null and must use versionId. It does not contradict annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint) and adds value.

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 well-structured with clear notes and covers all necessary points without redundancy. It is slightly longer than minimal but every sentence adds value. A more structured bulleted format could improve readability slightly.

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 complexity (8 optional parameters, output schema exists, annotations rich), the description is remarkably complete. It covers filtering, pagination, limitations, edge cases, and references sibling tools. No gaps remain.

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%, but the description adds significant context beyond the schema: it explains cursor-based pagination, the default limit, and the special case of versionId when id is null. This enhances understanding of how parameters interact.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'Carbone templates', and specifies filtering, search, and pagination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like delete_template and download_template by focusing on listing and retrieval.

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 provides explicit when-to-use context: 'List stored Carbone templates with filtering, search, and pagination.' It also notes an explicit alternative: 'filtering by tags is not supported by the Carbone API — use list_tags to discover tags, then filter results manually.' Additionally, it explains behavior for templates with versioning disabled.

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