list_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a catalogue of what a read returns, which is genuinely useful context, but nothing about ordering, whether templates_dir changes the source, or what happens when the directory is empty. Useful but not rich beyond 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?

A single front-loaded sentence that puts the resource type first, then the catalogue. The parenthetical lists earn their place by telling the agent what to expect. Slightly dense but no wasted wording.

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-value explanation is not needed, and the read-only annotations settle safety. The one meaningful gap is the undocumented templates_dir, which leaves a required piece of call-correctness to guesswork for a low-complexity 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?

One optional parameter, templates_dir, has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description. With coverage below 50%, the description is expected to compensate and does not — an agent cannot tell whether passing it points at a custom template directory or filters the built-in catalogue.

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?

Specific verb 'List' plus resource 'templates', with an enumeration of exactly what categories are returned (SDK style, BSIPA bare/core/disableable, item templates). This implicitly separates it from siblings like add_item_template and create_project, which consume rather than enumerate templates. It does not name a sibling explicitly, so it stops just short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is a discovery step before add_item_template or create_project. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no note about whether listing is required before adding/creating, and no exclusions.

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