graphic_templates

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds useful context about what a template contains, what each template specifies, and the limitation that templates are starting points rather than fully custom solutions.

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 short and every sentence contributes. The first sentence is slightly awkward with 'proofcut ships,' but the overall structure is efficient and front-loads the core resource before giving usage guidance.

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 output schema, full parameter documentation, and rich annotations, nothing essential is missing. The description explains what the tool returns, when to consult it, and how it relates to graphic_new and custom HTML.

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% and the parameter description already explains that name optionally selects one template and that unset returns every template with its slots. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource as the animated graphic templates shipped with proofcut, including their phases and slots. It lacks an explicit verb like 'list' or 'inspect,' but the content and the pointer to graphic_new make the tool's role clear.

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?

It explicitly says to read this before graphic_new with a template, which tells the agent when this tool is a prerequisite. It also frames templates as a starting point and notes that an HTML page can do anything CSS can, implying when custom code is preferable.

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