list_questionnaire_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 behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the tool lists all available templates, indicating a read-only operation with no filtering. It does not mention potential nuances like archived templates or pagination, but given the simplicity of the operation, the core behavior is transparent.

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 immediately identifies the action, resource, and scope. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or irrelevant content.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequately complete: it states what is listed and the scope. It does not describe the return structure, but that is a minor omission for such a straightforward operation.

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 input schema has 0 parameters, and the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but none are needed since the tool takes no arguments.

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 verb 'List', the specific resource 'questionnaire templates', and the scope 'all in the IntakeQ account'. It distinguishes this tool from sibling list tools by naming a distinct entity (questionnaire templates vs. intake forms, notes, invoices, etc.).

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 when an agent needs to enumerate questionnaire templates. Although no explicit alternatives or exclusion criteria are given, the scope ('all') and resource are unambiguous, providing clear context for when this tool is appropriate.

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