list_sql_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions filters and the overview purpose but does not disclose pagination behavior, result size, or any read-only guarantee. For a simple list tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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 zero filler. It conveys the core purpose and filters efficiently.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, return format details are unnecessary. The description covers filtering and usage context. It could mention the limit parameter or pagination, but the tool is simple enough that the description is largely complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the filter capabilities for category, doc_type, and verified_only. It does not mention limit, but that is a standard pagination parameter; overall it adds meaningful context beyond the schema titles.

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 states the tool lists templates from the library with optional filters by category, document type, and verification status. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_sql_template (single retrieval) and search_sql_template (search), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 includes '用于总览' (for overview), which gives a mild usage hint, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over search or semantic_search, nor does it provide exclusions. This is implied rather than explicit.

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