email_templates_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered without the description. The description adds only the note about dynamic variables being resolved at send time and the default category; it says nothing about pagination, ordering, or what a returned template looks like. Useful but thin against an already-complete annotation set.

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 short sentences with the core action front-loaded and no filler. The middle sentence about dynamic variables is tangential to a listing call but does provide context about what a template contains, so it earns partial keep.

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 two-parameter, optional-parameter read-only list tool with full schema coverage and complete annotations, the description covers action, scope, and filtering adequately. The only gap is the absence of any indication of return shape or result size, which is minor for this tool's complexity.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the category enum is fully documented in the schema, including the default. The description restates the enum values and adds the framing that category corresponds to document type, plus 'selected company' hints that companyId falls back to configuration. That is marginal added meaning over a schema that already does the work, so baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all email templates') plus the scope ('configured for the selected company'), which is enough to distinguish it from the email_templates_create/update/delete siblings without opening any schema. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 tells the agent how to use the category filter and gives the default, which is real usage guidance for the parameter. It does not say when to reach for this tool versus related listing tools (e.g. pdf_template_config_templates) or when listing is unnecessary, so usage is implied rather than framed as when/when-not.

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