Workbooks List Templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the organization-wide scope, which is real context, but discloses nothing about pagination or the limit default of 200, which matters for a list endpoint that may truncate results.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler; nothing is padded. It is efficient, though it is efficient at the cost of the detail the tool actually needs.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the read-only annotations cover safety. What remains missing is any routing signal against the many template siblings and any behavior for the undocumented limit parameter, leaving the definition only minimally viable.

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?

There is one parameter (limit, default 200) and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining it — and says nothing. Max-result behavior, pagination, and whether the default caps results are all left to inference.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (templates) and scopes it to 'the organization', which is genuinely useful. However, it never distinguishes itself from the near-identical sibling workbooks_list_shared_templates, leaving the agent to guess which list is the right one.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no named alternative despite several adjacent template tools (get_template, list_shared_templates, create_workbook_from_template, save_template_from_workbook). The only context is the implicit org-wide scope.

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