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

The description discloses the version selection behavior ('published if any, else latest') and that the definition body is included. This goes beyond the readOnly annotation to explain exactly what the tool returns, enhancing transparency.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and the alternative tool mention is placed appropriately. No unnecessary verbosity.

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, the description covers what the tool returns, how to retrieve older versions, and the optional parameter choice. It is complete for an agent to decide when and how to use it.

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?

The schema already fully describes both parameters (slug and template_id) with 'provide this or template_id' hints. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what is in the schema, so the baseline score 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?

Clearly states the action (Get) and resource (single api template) and specifies that it returns the current version's definition body. It also distinguishes from reading older versions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 user when to use this tool vs the alternative: 'Use get_api_template_version to read a specific older version.' This provides clear guidance on when to choose this tool over the sibling tool.

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