ilovevideoeditor_list_templates

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'List' signals a read-only operation, but the description does not mention pagination, response format, or any limitations. It's not misleading, but it lacks additional context beyond the obvious read-only implication.

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, clear sentence with no filler words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's 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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description provides sufficient context by stating it lists all templates for personalized video generation. It does not explain the exact structure of the list (e.g., template IDs vs. names), but given the low complexity, this is a minor gap.

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, which sets a baseline of 4. The description correctly does not attempt to explain non-existent parameters. No additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'available iLoveVideoEditor templates' and adds context 'for generating personalized videos.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ilovevideoeditor_get_template, which retrieves a specific template rather than enumerating all.

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 a clear use case: enumerating all available templates. It doesn't explicitly state when to use alternative tools like get_template, but the intent is unambiguous for a listing operation. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, so it falls short of an explicit 5.

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