templates_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions automatic pagination, which is helpful, but fails to disclose other critical traits such as read-only nature, permission requirements, error handling, or response format. The information is incomplete.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no filler, and the main action is front-loaded. Every word contributes value.

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 listing tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the return value shape, what a template is, or details of pagination beyond automatic following. An agent would lack sufficient context to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema; the note on automatic pagination relates to maxPages and pageToken but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action (list) and resource (GTM templates) within a workspace. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by specifying 'templates' as the target, though it could be more explicit about the scope.

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 for listing templates, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when to avoid it. The sibling tools are all for different resources, so context is implied but not stated.

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