cigchat_list_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 discloses the HTTP method (GET) and a required auth scope, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or any side effects. The auth requirement adds some value beyond a bare 'list' statement.

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 one concise sentence that includes the operation, endpoint, and auth requirement. No wasted words; every element serves a purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with a clear name and endpoint. The description is adequate for a basic list operation, but given many sibling list tools, it could benefit from clarifying what type of templates (e.g., generic vs. WhatsApp) and any notable behavior. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists, so that burden is not explicitly required.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter (name, page, limit) has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

The description clearly states the tool gets a list of templates, with the endpoint [GET /templates] and a required scope. It is specific about the verb and resource, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'cigchat_whatsapp_template_list' beyond the resource name. Still, the purpose is 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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires the 'Manage Team' scope on the token') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain scenarios or exclusions, so an agent gets little direction on selection.

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