openwisp_list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The HTTP endpoint annotation ('HTTP GET /api/v1/controller/template/') does signal a read-only, idempotent operation, which is genuine value, but nothing is said about pagination behavior (page/page_size defaults), result shape, or rate limits for a 12-parameter listing endpoint.

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 compact clauses: purpose and resource first, then the backing endpoint. No filler, though the '[Category: Templates]' tag is mild administrative noise.

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 simple list endpoint with 100% schema coverage the core is present, but with no output schema and no annotations the description says nothing about return shape or pagination defaults, leaving the agent to infer the response format.

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%, so all 12 parameters are already documented in the schema, setting the baseline at 3. The description's parenthetical categories loosely map to the 'type' enum but adds no filtering syntax or semantics beyond what the schema supplies.

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 OpenWISP configuration templates') and enumerates the kinds of templates returned (VPN, WiFi SSIDs, Firewall, Network rules), so an agent knows exactly what this returns. It does not explicitly contrast with get_template or the sibling list tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as get_template, nor any mention of pagination, default page size, or when the filter parameters are worth supplying. Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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