cigchat_facebook_utility_message_template_list

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden; it adds the required 'Manage Flow' scope and endpoint. However, it does not disclose return shape, pagination semantics, or whether listing has side effects, leaving some burden unmet.

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?

Two focused sentences: front-loads verb and resource, then adds endpoint and auth. No filler or redundant 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?

For a simple list with 3 optional params and no output schema, the description includes endpoint and auth but omits response format and pagination/filtering behavior. It is adequate but leaves gaps that matter when invoking 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?

Schema covers all three parameters with descriptions (100%), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Clearly states the action ('List'), the resource ('Facebook utility message templates'), and includes the endpoint. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create/delete/send/broadcast/sync variants for the same resource.

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?

Provides endpoint and auth requirement, but no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like list_templates or whatsapp_template_list. Usage must be inferred from the verb/resource, so guidance is implied rather than stated.

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