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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavioral context: the tool returns both the published version and current draft, includes requiredParams and paramOverrides, and is the required precursor to update_template_draft. It doesn't cover error cases or auth, but the annotations plus this context are sufficient for a read-only fetch.

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?

Two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the endpoint and payload fields; the second provides critical usage guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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 read tool with one fully documented parameter and annotations covering safety, the description provides enough return-value detail despite no output schema: it names the key fields and the relationship to update_template_draft. An agent can confidently select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, with the only parameter templateId fully documented as 'The template id (UUID).' The description confirms the parameter appears in the URL path but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Get one template with its published version and its current draft', and lists the exact fields returned (content, logTitle/logDescription, requiredParams, paramOverrides). It also gives the endpoint '(GET /templates/{id})', making it easy to distinguish from siblings like list_templates or update_template_draft.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Read this before update_template_draft, which needs the full body.' This names the sibling alternative and gives a clear sequencing rule, so an agent knows this is the prerequisite read for a specific downstream action.

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