clickup_get_list_templates

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

While annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive traits, the description adds substantial behavioral details: pagination mechanism (server returns all, client windows with limit/offset), return format selection (markdown or json), and error conditions (401/403, missing env var). This goes well 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 well-structured with clear sections (intro, when to use, when not to use, returns, pagination, examples, error handling). Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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 the tool has an output schema (so return values are documented elsewhere), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, usage guidance, parameter semantics, pagination, and error handling. It is complete for an agent to use this tool effectively.

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 input schema has parameter descriptions, but the tool description compensates for the low schema description coverage (0%) by explaining the meaning and usage of each parameter, including the fallback for team_id, windowing behavior for limit/offset, and response_format control.

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 'List available List templates for a Workspace' and distinguishes the tool from siblings by explaining that its output feeds specific creation tools. It also contrasts with the 'when NOT to use' case, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly provides 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections, directing the agent to other tools (clickup_create_list_from_template_in_folder/_in_space) when the template_id is already known. Also includes error handling guidance for missing team_id.

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