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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read. The description adds useful context by disclosing that the response includes saved sections and fees, but it does not discuss errors, permissions, or response completeness.

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 no wasted words. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the endpoint is included as compact supplementary 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?

For a simple single-resource read tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it says what the tool fetches and what the template includes. A slightly fuller note on the response shape would be useful, but the core need is met.

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 100%, and the template_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including its source. The description adds no further parameter syntax or constraints, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: "Get one template." It also clarifies scope by saying it returns the saved sections and fees, which distinguishes it from the sibling list_templates tool.

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?

Usage is implied: fetch a single template by id, with the schema noting the id comes from bidsketch_list_templates. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative, so an agent must infer the workflow.

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