get_templateGet a template's fields. The source prompt body is returned only when the account is entitled to use the template.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | ||
| uiLanguage | No | EN |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| view | Yes | ||
| message | No | ||
| template | Yes | ||
| entitlement | Yes | ||
| localization | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool read-only and non-destructive. The description adds a meaningful behavioral trait: the source prompt body is returned only when the account is entitled to the template, which signals an authorization-dependent response.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the entitlement condition earns its place as important behavioral information.
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?
The presence of an output schema covers return-value details, and annotations cover safety. However, the description still lacks sibling differentiation and parameter semantics, so an agent receives enough to invoke it but not enough to reliably select it over search_templates in every context.
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%, so the description needed to explain the parameters and compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions. It does not mention name, uiLanguage, or how they affect the result, leaving parameter semantics entirely to the schema's bare names.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a template's fields.' This is clear and mostly distinguishes the tool from siblings such as search_templates, which searches templates, and build_prompt, which builds prompts. However, it does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, so it stops short of full differentiation.
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?
No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over siblings like search_templates or get_language_options. The entitlement clause explains a condition on output but not a usage context or exclusions.
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.
Most tools are clearly separated by resource and action, but translate_text/localize_text and prepare_compare/prepare_custom_compare have adjacent purposes that could cause an agent to choose one when the other is intended. Descriptions provide enough distinction for a careful model, so the ambiguity is limited.
All 15 tools follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern with verbs like build, detect, get, localize, open, prepare, run, search, transcribe, translate, and validate. There is no mixing of camelCase, vague imperative fragments, or generic action names.
15 tools is at the upper edge of a well-scoped set, and each functional area has dedicated tools. It is slightly heavy because a few pairs like translate/localize and prepare_compare/prepare_custom_compare are close variations, but the count is still reasonable for the server's broad workspace scope.
Core workflows are covered: template search/get/fill, translation and localization, custom model capabilities/validation/run, compare plan preparation, transcription, and entitlement checks. Gaps include no compare-plan execution tool, no template create/update/delete lifecycle, and no persistence for custom model configurations, but agents can work around these.