get_available_templates

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It indicates a read-only operation ('fetches') but does not disclose any additional traits such as authentication requirements, response format details, or whether the list is sorted. This leaves the agent with minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 concise sentence that delivers the core purpose without any filler. It is appropriately front-loaded and efficient.

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 no-parameter tool, the description is sufficient to inform the agent that it returns a list of template IDs. However, it could have added context about how these IDs are used with sibling tools (e.g., as input to generate_cv_pdf), which would make it more 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings, and the schema is empty. No additional parameter semantics are required.

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 uses a specific verb 'fetches' and clearly identifies the resource as 'list of valid template string IDs supported by CV Maker'. This distinguishes it from siblings like generate_cv_pdf or export_cv_json, which perform different operations.

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 that this tool is used to retrieve template IDs when needed, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The context signals show siblings with different purposes, so usage is indirectly clear.

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