list_templates

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses what data is returned ('IDs and names'), helping predict output structure. However, missing safety/permission info, pagination behavior, or rate limits that would be essential for a production tool with no annotation coverage.

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 with zero waste. First sentence establishes purpose and return value; second provides usage context. Front-loaded structure with every sentence earning 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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, description adequately compensates by specifying return fields ('IDs and names'). Sufficient for low-complexity tool, though could mention pagination or total volume limits for complete production context.

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?

Input schema contains zero parameters. Per rubric guidelines, zero-parameter tools receive baseline score of 4. Description appropriately does not invent parameter semantics where none exist.

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 provides specific verb ('List'), resource ('caption style templates'), scope ('all available'), and return fields ('IDs and names'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling list tools (list_music, list_game_videos) by specifying 'caption style' resource.

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?

Second sentence establishes workflow connection to sibling tool create_short ('Use the templateId when creating shorts'), implying when to invoke this tool. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or comparison to alternative listing tools, but provides clear contextual purpose.

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