faz_list_report_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description need not repeat safety traits. The description adds the 'in an ADOM' scope, which is useful context, but does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as authentication needs, defaults, or side effects. No contradiction with 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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the purpose. Every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

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 one optional parameter and an output schema, so return values need no explanation. However, the description omits parameter behavior (optionality/default), and given the many sibling list tools, it could clarify how report templates differ from layouts/schedules. This leaves minor but noticeable gaps.

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 0%; the 'adom' parameter has no description. The tool description mentions 'in an ADOM', which hints that the adom parameter specifies the ADOM, but it does not explain that the parameter is optional, possible values, or behavior when omitted. This insufficiently compensates for the lack of schema documentation.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('available report templates') with a scope ('in an ADOM'). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like faz_list_report_layouts and faz_list_report_schedules by naming the exact resource type.

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 implies usage when you need report templates, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives among the many sibling list tools. Context is clear but exclusions and alternatives are absent.

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