list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List all installed' conveys a read-only, non-destructive action implicitly. The description tells the agent this returns template names plus their variable listings, which gives a useful preview of the return structure without needing error-path details for a simple listing operation.

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, focused sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the verb ('List') and the object ('all installed resume templates') and then expands with the output detail ('and their variables'). Every part earns its place.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It tells the agent what the output will cover (templates + variables). Additional details like output format or pagination would be nice but aren't essential for a simple no-arg enumeration tool in the presence of rich sibling names that convey the broader workflow.

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 0 parameters, so there are no schema details to document. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description meaningfully states what the output covers (template names and their variables), which supplements the empty schema and gives the agent an accurate expectation of results.

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' and resource 'all installed resume templates and their variables.' This distinguishes it from siblings like compile_template and compile_resume since it's a listing/introspection operation rather than a compilation or export operation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from a hypothetical template-management sibling beyond the listing focus.

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 this is a discovery/introspection tool — useful for learning what templates and variable names are available before calling compile/export tools. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it name sibling tools or explain that it should be called before compiling a resume.

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