create_record_template

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

Annotations offer no help (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false); the description only states it creates, omitting details on idempotency, error conditions, or side effects. The agent lacks insight into behavioral traits beyond the basic action.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose, return value, and a follow-up step. No extraneous information; every word earns its place.

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 covers the core function and return, but lacks explanation of the debug parameter, default name behavior, and broader context of record templates within the sibling tool set. Given no output schema, more detail could be helpful.

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?

Input schema covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage); the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 clearly states the tool creates a record template for a table, specifies the return value (rtp-prefixed templateId), and differentiates from siblings like set_record_template_cell by providing a sequential workflow hint.

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 provides a single follow-up recommendation (use set_record_template_cell) but does not contrast with other sibling tools like apply_record_template or duplicate_record_template, nor does it specify when not to use the tool.

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