sigma_list_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds only the scope 'in the organization', which is useful context, but it does not disclose pagination behavior or the effect of the limit parameter. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence that directly states the action and scope with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and earns its place.

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 output schema, and annotations, the description is minimally viable. However, it omits any mention of the limit parameter and does not clarify how this tool differs from listing shared templates. These omissions could lead to incorrect usage, so a bit more context is needed.

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 schema has one parameter, 'limit', with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving its purpose and behavior entirely undocumented in both the schema and the description. The description fails to compensate for the missing parameter semantics.

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' with the resource 'templates' and clarifies scope as 'in the organization', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also implicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool sigma_list_shared_templates by emphasizing org ownership.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sigma_get_template or sigma_list_shared_templates. The description simply states what it does without any contextual or exclusions; the agent is left to infer when it is the appropriate choice.

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