mailkite_list_templates

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

annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful context: only light metadata is returned, not the body, plus a specific auth requirement. This goes beyond the annotation by setting expectations on payload scope.

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 sentences with zero waste: the verb, scope, payload detail, alternative, and auth are each front-loaded and purposeful. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema, the description states purpose, return granularity, alternative, and auth. Minor details like pagination or ordering are not broadly expected, so the coverage is solid but not flawless.

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 the schema is already fully documented (empty object). With no parameters to elaborate on, the baseline 4 is appropriate for this 0-param case.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'List your saved email templates' with the clarifying scope 'light metadata only — no body'. It differentiates from getTemplate and implicitly from list_base_templates by emphasizing saved templates, so an agent can clearly tell it apart from siblings.

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 an explicit alternative ('Use getTemplate for the full template') and a precondition ('Requires a management session token'). It does not contrast with mailkite_list_base_templates, but the main decision between list and get template is well-specified.

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