List Advanced Scenarios templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds no further behavioral detail such as pagination, response structure, or side effects, but for a simple list operation this is acceptable.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence: 'List Purple Team / Advanced Scenarios templates available.' No unnecessary words, perfectly concise.

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-parameter read-only list tool, the description is adequate. It does not mention the returned data format, but the tool's simplicity and annotations reduce the need for more detail. A slight gap is the absence of any note about the response structure.

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 has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to explain any parameters.

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 explicitly states 'List Purple Team / Advanced Scenarios templates available', using a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like cymulate_bas_list_templates or cymulate_fkc_scenarios_list_templates by naming the module.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for listing Advanced/Purple Team templates, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. The context is sufficient for an agent to infer its usage in the Advanced module.

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