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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Prompt discarded' directly tells the agent that its prompt will not affect the returned template, which is the key non-obvious behavior. It does not mention auth, errors, or side effects, but for a pure template-returning tool the most important trait is disclosed.

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 short sentences with the core deliverable front-loaded and no filler. 'Prompt discarded' is a valuable behavioral note that earns its place rather than repeating schema 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 core purpose and the discard behavior are stated, and all parameters are optional, so no mandatory input is left unexplained. However, the nine-parameter schema is a strange grab-bag of unrelated fields, and the description does not clarify whether or how to populate them, or what the three steps in the template actually are.

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?

All nine parameters are fully documented in the input schema, so the description is not required to add per-parameter detail. The description only adds the general 'prompt discarded' hint, which does not meaningfully extend the schema's already explicit 'discarded' notes on individual parameters.

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 deliverable: return a three-step thinking template. 'Prompt discarded' further distinguishes it from sibling tools by clarifying it is a static template helper, not a tool that acts on user input. This is enough for an agent to know what the tool does.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools, no preconditions, and no explicit recommendation to call it with no parameters. 'Prompt discarded' describes behavior but does not help an agent decide when to invoke the tool or what to pass.

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