get_css_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'Get detail' which implies a read operation, but does not explicitly declare it as read-only or safe. It also lacks any mention of permissions or side effects. The description is adequate but could be more transparent about the operation's nature.

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?

The description is concise, starting with the purpose followed by parameter explanations. It is well-structured and easy to read, but could be slightly improved by using a more formal format or listing parameters as bullet points.

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?

Given that it is a simple read tool with two parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the core functionality and parameter meanings. It lacks explicit mention of return behavior, but that is likely documented in the output schema. Overall, it is complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 0%, meaning the schema properties have no descriptions. The tool description adds meaning by specifying 'The CSS template ID' for template_id and listing the possible response_mode values. This compensates for the missing schema descriptions, though it could be more detailed (e.g., explaining each response mode).

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 'Get detail for a single CSS template,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_css_templates (which lists all) and create/update/delete (which modify).

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?

While no explicit when-to-use or alternatives are mentioned, the description makes it clear that this tool is for fetching details of a specific template by ID, implying it should be used when you have a template_id and need full details. However, missing explicit exclusion of list_css_templates for browsing.

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