list_text_message_templates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the non-obvious default limit override (limit=100 instead of schema's 10) and explains pagination behavior via _metadata. It does not cover auth, rate limits, or return format, but for a read-only list operation, the key behaviors are transparently stated.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second explains the default override, and the third provides pagination guidance. The most important information is front-loaded, and there is 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?

For a tool with no required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description effectively covers purpose, default behavior, and pagination – the main things an agent needs to call it correctly. It could mention the return envelope or filtering options, but given the low complexity, the description is complete enough.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by clarifying that the actual default limit is 100 (not the schema's 10) and by contextualizing extraQuery with an example. This goes beyond the schema's raw descriptions and helps an agent decide how to set parameters.

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 verb and resource: 'Lists all text message templates.' This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_text_messages (messages, not templates) and list_templates (generic templates). Including the endpoint 'GET /textMessageTemplates' further anchors its purpose.

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 provides clear context on when and how to use the tool: it notes that bulk requests are the common case, justifies the default limit override, and gives explicit pagination instructions with both offset and cursor examples ('use `offset` ... or `_metadata.next` cursor value'). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the pagination guidance is practical and actionable.

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