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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description adds value by explaining that all templates support a full 5x2 matrix of sizes and orientations. This provides concrete behavioral detail beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence contributes meaningful information without verbosity. The examples and sibling reference are efficient and helpful.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (the matrix of page sizes and orientations) and notes that all templates support the matrix. This is complete for a simple read-only information tool.

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 already provides 100% description coverage for the 'templateName' parameter (ID or name). The description does not add further semantic detail about the parameter; it focuses on the tool's output. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 states the tool shows 'available variants (page sizes and orientations) for a specific template,' using specific verbs and resources. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_all_templates' which list templates rather than variants for a single template.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'when the user asks does this template come in Legal Landscape?' and positions it as a prerequisite for 'convert_document.' This provides clear guidance on when to use the tool and its relationship to a sibling.

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