list_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=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the endpoint path — no pagination, no result-size expectations, no sorting semantics beyond what the schema states. It also does not clarify whether this returns all templates or only ones visible to the caller.

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?

Two very short sentences with no padding, which is good, but the brevity comes at the cost of substance — the first sentence is misleading and the second is a raw path that duplicates nothing useful for an agent.

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 list operation with four parameters, no output schema, and no pagination metadata, the description should explain filtering, ordering, and return shape. It covers none of these, leaving the agent to infer behavior entirely from the schema and annotations.

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 description coverage is 50%: sort and order carry descriptions, but app and the required project_id are undocumented in both schema and description. The description never mentions the app filter or the sort/order combination, so it adds nothing beyond the schema and leaves half the parameters unexplained.

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 says 'Get template' (singular) while the tool name and the endpoint GET /project/{project_id}/templates indicate a collection listing. The verb is imprecise and no scope or sibling differentiation is offered, so an agent cannot tell this apart from get_template or list_view_templates from the text alone.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is given; the only context is the raw HTTP path. There is no indication of how this differs from get_template, list_template_permissions, or list_template_tasks, all of which are plausible alternatives in the sibling list.

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