template_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'List available templates,' which implies a non-destructive read operation, but does not elaborate on what 'available' means, whether the result is filtered by permissions or status, or whether the category parameter affects the output. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a thin behavioral disclosure.

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 focused sentence, front-loading the action and resource with no wasted words or repetition of the tool name. It is appropriately concise for a straightforward listing 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?

The tool has only one optional parameter and an output schema, so the description need not explain return values. However, given the large sibling set and the absence of any usage guidance, the description feels minimally complete: it states the purpose but leaves the agent to infer when to choose this tool over similar listing tools.

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 schema already documents the single 'category' parameter with a full description of allowed values, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly identifies the verb ('List') and resource ('available Amazon Connect configuration templates'), specifying exactly what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like cases_list_templates and template_get by focusing on 'configuration templates' rather than case templates or individual retrieval.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling listing tools (e.g., cases_list_templates, config_list_contact_flows, ai_list_quick_responses), the description gives no contextual hints for tool selection or exclusions.

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