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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does disclose the initial state ('blank') and that content is optional, which is useful. However, it does not mention uniqueness constraints, default behavior, error conditions, or what the result of creation is.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and conveys all the essential information it includes efficiently.

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 simple two-parameter create tool, the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks explicit differentiation from template_upload, behavioral details like idempotency or uniqueness, and any indication of the return value or post-creation state.

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 0%, but the description does add meaning by identifying 'name' and 'markdown content' as the inputs and noting that content is optional. It still does not explain name requirements, content formatting details, or the relationship between the parameters beyond what the schema structure implies.

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 a specific verb, 'create', and a specific resource, 'template', and clarifies it is a 'blank' template with 'name and optional markdown content.' This clearly distinguishes the action from sibling tools like template_update or template_upload.

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 implies usage for creating a new blank template, especially via the word 'blank' which contrasts with template_upload. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of template_upload or template_update, nor does it mention any alternatives.

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