get_templateFetch the raw .gitignore content for the named template (case-sensitive, e.g. "Node", "Python", "macOS").
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | Template name without the .gitignore suffix. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| body | Yes | Raw .gitignore template content | |
| name | Yes | Template name that was requested |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "name": "Node"
+ },
+ {
+ "name": "Python"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "body": {
+ "description": "Raw .gitignore template content",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Template name that was requested",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "name",
+ "body"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds case-sensitivity and examples, but no further behavioral traits beyond schema and 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?
Single sentence, front-loaded, no wasted 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?
Low complexity; annotations and output schema cover most; description is sufficient for usage.
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 coverage 100%; description adds value by specifying case-sensitivity and examples, enhancing schema info.
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?
Clear verb 'Fetch', resource 'raw .gitignore content for named template', case-sensitivity and examples provided. Distinguishes from sibling 'list_templates'.
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?
Context clear: use to fetch content of a specific template. Implicitly not for listing. No explicit when-not but sibling differentiates.
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.