list_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no new behavioral details beyond the fact that it lists templates, which is implied. It does not mention return format, pagination, or other runtime behavior. With annotations present, this is acceptable but adds minimal value beyond the annotations.

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 with no fluff. Every word contributes to the purpose, and it is efficiently structured.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it lists templates for a collective, and annotations cover safety. The only gap is the lack of explicit parameter explanation, but that is minor given the tool's simplicity. The description is adequate for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 0% and the description does not explain the parameter. The only parameter, collectiveId, is named clearly, but the description does not explicitly state that this ID identifies the collective whose templates are to be listed. Given the low schema coverage, the description should compensate by explaining the parameter, but it does not.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List page templates defined for a Collective.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_pages (which lists pages) and get_template (which retrieves a single template). The agent can immediately understand what this tool does without ambiguity.

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 implies usage—listing templates for a specific collective—but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. For example, it doesn't mention that get_template is for a single template or that list_pages is for pages. The context is clear, but there are no exclusions or explicit guidance on choosing between related list/retrieve tools.

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