medeval_list_generation_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 'installed in the local MedEval backend' detail, which provides minor location context but no new behavioral traits beyond 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?

A single, efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action and object. No redundant phrasing or filler; every word contributes.

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 zero-parameter list operation with rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive) and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could briefly mention that these templates are used by generation tasks (e.g., medeval_start_generation), but that is implied by the tool name and sibling context, so the absence is not critical.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document. Baseline is 4 for parameterless tools, and there is no additional parameter semantics required.

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 states a specific verb (List), a resource (generation templates), and a scope (installed in the local MedEval backend). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like medeval_list_projects and medeval_list_runs, which target different resources.

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 (call this when you need to see available generation templates) but does not provide explicit context or mention alternatives. It lacks any 'when not to use' guidance or hints about prerequisites, such as needing templates before starting a generation task via medeval_start_generation.

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