Render a prompt template by substituting {{variable}} placeholders with provided values.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| prompt_h | Yes | Prompt hub hash (40-char hex) | |
| tenant_id | No | Tenant UUID | |
| variables | No | Template variables as key-value pairs (e.g., {"subject": "cityscape"}) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "tenant_id",
- "prompt_h"
-]New value: +[
+ "prompt_h"
+]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. It explains the substitution operation but does not disclose read-only status, authentication requirements, tenant scoping needs, or whether rendering has side effects.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and mechanism without any wasted words. Appropriately sized for the tool's 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?
With three parameters, a nested object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally viable. It omits return value details, tenant context, and behavioral traits that an agent would need for confident use.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters in detail. The description references placeholders and provided values but adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides.
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 ('Render') and resource ('prompt template') along with the substitution mechanism. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling retrieval tools like GetPrompt, but the action is 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?
Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as GetPrompt, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer context entirely from the name and schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.