get_templates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of indicating safety and side effects. 'List' clearly implies a read-only operation with no destructive behavior, which is adequate for this simple tool. However, it does not disclose details such as return format, ordering, or permissions, which would add further transparency.

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 concise sentence that states the action and scope with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter list tool, the description is largely sufficient. It does not describe the response shape, but the tool name and description make the expected return value (templates) obvious. The absence of an output schema raises only minor ambiguity, so the description is nearly complete.

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% for the single project_id parameter, so the schema already fully documents the parameter. The description only reinforces that templates are scoped to a project without adding new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('templates'), and a scope ('for a project'). There are no sibling template tools, so it is easily distinguishable from the provided siblings without requiring schema inspection.

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 clearly conveys when to call the tool: when the agent needs templates belonging to a project. It does not explicitly discuss exclusions or alternatives, but no template-related sibling tool exists, so the usage context is clear without additional routing guidance.

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