LightCMS

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, confirming the safe read nature. The description adds minimal behavioral context: 'all available' implies broad scope without filtering, and the definitional sentence clarifies what templates contain (fields/HTML). However, it lacks details on pagination, response format, or empty result handling.

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 concise sentences. The first sentence is front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence provides domain context about template structure, which earns its place by helping distinguish templates from similar resources like snippets or assets, though it shifts slightly from describing the tool to describing the resource.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (no parameters, read-only) and lack of output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it should ideally hint at the return value structure (e.g., 'returns array of template metadata') to compensate for the missing output schema.

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?

Input schema contains zero parameters (empty object with additionalProperties:false). Per evaluation guidelines, zero parameters establishes a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics to elaborate upon.

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 the action ('List') and resource ('templates') in the first sentence. The scope 'all available' implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_template' (single item retrieval), though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_template' (for single template details) or 'create_template'. The second sentence defines what templates are conceptually, not when to invoke the listing operation.

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