semantic_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructiveness. The description adds a useful behavioral detail not present in annotations: the tool is free and will not consume credits. It also clarifies the value of the operation (learning about query capabilities) without contradicting the 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 well-structured sentence. The primary action and resource are front-loaded, and the added guidance about being free and useful before semantic_query earns its place by helping the agent choose correctly.

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 listing tool with no parameters and a clear purpose, the description is nearly complete. It explains what is returned (query templates), the reason to call it, and the benefit. It does not describe the exact format of the template list, but that is acceptable for a low-complexity tool with no output schema.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema imposes no burden. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and there is nothing here that is left ambiguous; baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('the query templates the semantic layer supports'), and its purpose. It also distinguishes the tool from semantic_query by noting it is free and meant for learning before spending credits.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: before calling semantic_query, to learn what questions the knowledge graph can answer. It names the related paid sibling implicitly, but does not explicitly describe when not to use it other than that implied cost distinction.

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