docs_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the shape of the result ('names and styles') and, via the account parameter context, that multi-account selection matters, but it says nothing about whether the gallery is static, whether results are paginated, or any auth requirements for the listing itself.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource and ends with the consumer relationship. Every clause earns its place with no redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 zero-required-parameter read-only listing with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns and why you would call it. It stops short of explaining how a returned template name is then passed to docs_create, which would have closed the loop fully.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single account parameter is fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional meaning about account handling, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a specific resource (Google Docs' template gallery), and enumerates the returned content (names and styles). It is clearly distinguishable from the nearest sibling docs_list, which lists the user's own documents rather than a static gallery.

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 phrase 'for docs_create's template' establishes the context in which this tool is used, routing the agent to it when it needs a template value. There is no explicit when-not guidance or statement of alternatives, but the intended call sequence is clear from the description alone.

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