List Status Page Templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered, but the description adds nothing beyond them. It says nothing about pagination behavior (despite page_size/page_number params), result ordering, or whether templates are inherited at the account level versus per status page.

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?

Three words with no waste, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness — there is no front-loaded scope statement or qualifier, so nothing is actually communicated beyond the title.

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?

Although an output schema exists (so return shape needn't be described), three of four input parameters are undocumented and no usage context is given. For a paginated, scoped list operation the description leaves the agent without enough to invoke it correctly without reading the raw schema.

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?

Only status_page_id carries schema documentation (25% coverage); include, page_size and page_number are entirely undocumented. The description does not compensate for that gap by explaining what `include` accepts or how paging works, so it relies on the one documented parameter.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the alternative get_status_page_template for fetching a single template, and no note that status_page_id is mandatory to scope the listing. The agent must infer all routing from the tool name alone.

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