linear_getIssueTemplates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral context (e.g., pagination, scope, or performance implications). It simply restates the tool's action without enhancing transparency beyond the annotations.

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, concise sentence with no filler. However, it could be improved by adding context about what an issue template is or how it differs from team templates. The brevity is not efficient if it sacrifices clarity.

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?

Despite having an output schema and complete annotations, the description lacks context about the scope (e.g., which team/organization), how it differs from similar list tools (e.g., 'getTeamTemplates'), and what the returned templates represent. This makes it incomplete for effective tool selection.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema documents all three parameters with descriptions. The description adds no additional insight or explanation for any parameter, making it functionally neutral. Baseline is 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?

The description says 'Get a list of issue templates,' which specifies the verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'linear_getTeamTemplates' – both return templates but presumably for different scopes (issue vs team). This lack of differentiation makes the purpose slightly vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'linear_getTeamTemplates' or 'linear_getIssueTemplateById'. The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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