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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds important behavioral context: FREE businesses cannot use, access must be verified, and the tool must be blocked when access is denied. This significantly enhances transparency beyond the annotations.

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, starting with the core purpose followed by usage instructions. It is relatively concise, though the instructions could be separated from the purpose for better clarity. No unnecessary words.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not explain what the template version response contains. The agent lacks information about the tool's return value. Additionally, parameter meanings are unclear. The description focuses heavily on access control but neglects to describe the tool's output, leaving it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's contract.

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 has zero description coverage (0%) for the three parameters. The description does not explain what communityId, chatId, or version represent. The only hint is that version refers to the template version, but the other parameters remain obscure. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the tool gets an AI Cofounder template for a specific version. The verb 'Get' and resource 'AI Cofounder template' are specific. Although siblings exist like batch_get_ai_cofounder_templates, the name and first sentence differentiate by focusing on a single version.

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 provides explicit, step-by-step guidance: check business permissions, note that FREE businesses cannot use it, call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs, show grace-period warnings and resubscribe links, and never proceed when access is blocked. This covers when to use, prerequisites, and prohibitions.

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