list_section_templates

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's disclosure that the return shape varies by input (categories vs templates) and that templates carry { id, name, thumbnail, kind } adds real behavioral context beyond the safely-read signal. It could say more about scale/paging behavior, but is solid for a read-only browse tool.

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?

Three dense, front-loaded sentences: purpose first, then input-dependent behavior, then the end-to-end workflow. Every clause earns its place with no 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 read-only, no-output-schema tool with full param coverage, this description is complete: it covers purpose, input branching, return fields, thumbnail inspection, and the downstream insertion/restyle path.

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 baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond: it explains the no-arg default behavior and that category_id must come from the no-arg call, plus how category_id/term combine — context the schema's terse strings do not convey.

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?

States a specific verb (Browse) and resource (designer-made section library / template picker) and enumerates concrete template kinds (hero, product showcase, testimonials, footer). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like add_section (insertion) and list_elements without opening either schema.

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?

Gives explicit branch conditions: 'No args → categories' and 'With category_id and/or term → templates'. It also names the follow-on alternative workflow (read_image to preview, add_section to insert, then restyle), so an agent knows exactly when to use this versus the sibling tools.

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