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

The phrase 'Prompt discarded' is a useful behavioral disclosure beyond the schema: it tells the agent the input prompt is not actually used. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description does not fully explain the output format or any side effects, so transparency is only partial.

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 behavioral note earns its place without adding unnecessary detail.

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 description names the return value and explicitly says the prompt is discarded, which is adequate for a simple template-returning tool. However, it does not describe the contents of the three-step template or clarify why the nine optional parameters exist, so some context is left to inference.

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 is 100%, and each parameter description already explains its purpose and notes that the value is discarded. The tool description adds little parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Return a three-step thinking template.' This clearly identifies what the tool produces. It does not differentiate from sibling tools, but no sibling appears to offer the same template function.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. 'Prompt discarded' is a behavior note, not a usage condition, so an agent has to infer when this tool is appropriate.

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