Get Templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds valuable behavioral details about paginated requests, handling large result sets, and transforming results into GetTemplatesElement objects, going beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and appropriately sized, but the first two sentences are redundant ('Get all templates' vs. 'Retrieves all templates'). The remaining sentences add meaningful behavioral context, though eliminating the duplication would make it stronger.

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 read-only tool with a single optional parameter, the description thoroughly covers purpose, filtering, pagination, and response transformation. The output schema handles return value specifics, and annotations provide safety signals, making this sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 single parameter template_type is fully described in the schema with its enum values and default, and the description merely restates 'optional filtering by template type.' With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no new parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 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 clearly states 'Get all templates from Automation Studio' with optional filtering by type, specifying the exact resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_command_templates by naming Automation Studio, though it does not explicitly call out alternatives.

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 gives context about templates being used for text processing and configuration generation, implying when to use this tool for retrieving templates in automation workflows. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from overlapping tools like get_command_templates.

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