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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the safety profile, the description adds useful behavioral context: it discloses what the response contains (recipient placeholders and fields) and the underlying v2 endpoint. It does not mention permission requirements, rate limits, or error behavior, but the annotation carries the safety burden.

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?

Three tight clauses with zero filler: the action and return content come first, the dependency guidance second, and the endpoint last. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is buried.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description compensates by naming what is returned (recipient placeholders and fields) and by routing the agent to the consumer tool. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 single templateId parameter is fully documented as the numeric id in the schema. The description adds no format or semantic detail beyond that, 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?

States a specific verb (Fetch) and resource (a single template), and distinguishes itself from the sibling list_templates by specifying 'a single template' with recipient placeholders and fields. An agent can immediately tell this apart from list_templates and create_document_from_template.

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 directs the agent to read this before calling documenso_create_document_from_template so it knows the recipient ids, which is a clear when-to-use rule tied to a named sibling. It does not state when not to use it or point to list_templates as the alternative for bulk retrieval, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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