wafle_agents_templates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating that there are exactly 5 templates and listing them, which goes beyond the annotations. It doesn't contradict 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 two sentences long, immediately starts with the verb and object, and every word earns its place. It lists all five templates compactly and then gives the usage pointer. No redundant formatting or filler.

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, no-output-schema tool with strong annotations, the description fully covers what the agent needs: the exact templates available and how to consume them. There is no missing behavioral or contextual information.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no schema to clarify. The rule for 0 params gives a baseline of 4; the description doesn't need to add parameter info. It doesn't mislead about any inputs.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('5 pre-armed agent templates'), and even enumerates the exact templates. This fully distinguishes it from sibling tools like wafle_agents_list (which lists actual agents, not templates) and wafle_agents_create (which creates agents).

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 explicitly tells the agent how to use the result: 'Use the `id` field as `from_template` in `wafle_agents_create`.' This provides a direct, actionable usage guideline. While it doesn't contrast with alternatives, the instruction is clear enough and the context of sibling tools fills in the rest.

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