list_templates

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds no further behavioral detail — notably it does not acknowledge that results are paginated despite page/limit parameters, and "List all templates" slightly oversells the default 25-per-page behavior.

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 short sentences with zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the usage hint. Every clause 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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description is adequate, and the ID-discovery hint is useful. With no output schema, however, it says nothing about the shape of the returned template records or the pagination envelope, leaving the agent to infer those.

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%, so all seven parameters (page, tags, limit, query, width, height, includeLayers) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, default, or filtering semantics beyond what the schema supplies, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("List all templates in the account") with a clear scope, so an agent immediately knows what it returns. It does not, however, differentiate itself from close siblings such as get_template, list_template_renders, or the template-filtering behavior that get_template_pages implies, so it stops short of a 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?

"Use this to find template IDs for rendering" gives an explicit, actionable reason to call this tool, which is more than implied usage. It names no alternatives or when-not conditions (e.g., use get_template when you already have an ID), so it does not reach the 5 level.

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