List Invoice Templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds no behavioral context at all - no indication of whether templates are paginated, whether they are user-scoped, or what a template represents. With annotations doing the work, this is a thin addition.

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 four-word phrase, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero waste. It is efficient, though its brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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-param, read-only list tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, little prose is strictly required. However, the description never clarifies what an invoice template is or how it relates to sibling concepts like invoice series or invoice info, leaving a real ambiguity an agent may need to resolve by trial.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 for a param-free schema applies.

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 verb ('Get') and a resource ('sales invoice templates'), which is clearer than the title alone, but it offers no differentiation from the many other list_* siblings (list_invoice_series, list_sale_invoices, list_sale_articles). An agent cannot tell from the text alone why 'templates' is distinct from invoice series or invoice info.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as list_invoice_info or get_invoice_info. The description gives the agent nothing to route on beyond the name.

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