list_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by noting that 'Template permissions and allowedTokens are cooperative advisory metadata: display labels only, not enforced', which explains behavioral traits beyond 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with main action. The first sentence states purpose, the second adds important nuance about metadata. No wasted words.

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 read-only list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides complete context: what it lists, the scope, and a behavioral caveat about metadata.

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?

There are no parameters; schema coverage is 100% (empty object). Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0 parameters. No additional parameter description needed.

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?

Description specifies 'List templates and their registered page pathnames from the active grab session', providing a clear verb-resource pairing. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_design_systems or list_content_systems, which operate on different resources.

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 states 'from the active grab session', giving clear context for when to use. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives, the context is sufficient to guide selection among siblings.

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