list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly communicates a read-only, listing behavior. However, it lacks details on pagination, performance, or error handling, which would be beneficial for a complete picture.

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 short (two sentences plus Args/Returns). It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the Returns section is vague ('A list of templates'), which could be improved by referencing the output schema for structure.

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?

For a simple list tool with one parameter and an output schema presumed rich, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not address edge cases (e.g., invalid project_id, empty results) or prerequisites for using the tool.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description only states 'ID of the project' for the single parameter. This adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's title and type, leaving the agent without guidance on how to obtain or format the project_id.

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 action 'List all templates' and specifies the resource 'for a project'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_template' (single template) and 'create_template' (creation). The verb-resource combination is specific and 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 use when needing all templates for a project, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use alternatives like 'get_template' for a specific template or 'list_template_schedules' for template schedules. No when-not-to-use or exclusion criteria are given.

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