list_template_schedules

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the operation is listing, implying read-only, but does not explicitly confirm idempotency, authentication needs, or side effects. The return type is mentioned, but not details about performance or limits.

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 very concise, consisting of a one-line purpose followed by structured Args and Returns sections. No extraneous information, and the format is clear and easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple with two required parameters and an output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks details on pagination, error behavior, or any constraints. For a list operation, these omissions reduce completeness slightly.

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 0% description coverage, but the description adds brief explanations for each parameter ('project_id: ID of the project', 'template_id: ID of the template'). While minimal, this clarifies that these are identifiers, adding value beyond the schema titles. The explanation is concise and functional.

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 'List schedules attached to a template,' specifying the action (list) and the resource (schedules) with a qualifier (attached to a template). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_schedules' which lists all schedules without template filtering.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_schedules' or other schedule-related tools. It does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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