list_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only states what the tool returns in vague terms. It does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, whether results are paginated, or how many names are returned. For a listing tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 extremely short and contains no filler, so it is concise. However, three words is arguably under-specified rather than optimally concise for a tool definition, and there is no structure beyond a fragment.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters and no output schema, so the description need not document arguments. Still, without an output schema it should say more about the return shape, such as whether it lists all templates or only names, and whether there are pagination or scope caveats.

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 the baseline score is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because there are none.

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 is just a noun phrase, 'Saved template names,' with no verb. It largely restates the tool name rather than describing the action. It does not distinguish this tool clearly from the sibling save_template beyond the obvious name contrast.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention save_template, play_recording, or any other sibling. The agent receives no context for selecting it over related tools.

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