List Stock Titles

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint=false, idempotent, non-destructive), but the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: it reads local .mogrt files only and does not contact Premiere, and it discloses the return shape (each template's text fields in order with default text). That is more than the annotations convey.

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?

Three front-loaded sentences with no filler: what is listed, what is returned, and the constraint/next step. Every sentence carries information an agent needs to select and use the tool.

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 single-optional-param, read-only list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, scope, return content, and handoff to add_title. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing, and return-value detail is properly delegated to the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single optional 'category' parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description's example names (Lower Thirds, Credits, Social Media) loosely echo category values but add no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the Essential Graphics title templates that ship with the installed Premiere Pro') and enumerates concrete examples (Basic Title, Lower Thirds, Credits, Social Media). It also distinguishes itself from importer siblings by noting it reads local .mogrt files only and does not contact Premiere, so an agent can tell it apart from import_mogrt or inspect_mogrt_library.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to the follow-up tool ('Use the names with add_title') and clarifies the no-Premiere-connection context. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use clause against the many mogrt-related siblings (import_mogrt, inspect_mogrt_library, preview_mogrt_recipe), but the usage path is clear.

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