card_builder_get_card_template

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

The description confirms it's a read-only operation returning the full config, but lacks details on what 'resolved' means, error handling, or permission requirements. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and provides minimal behavioral context.

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 tightly written sentences: first states the action, second tells what to do with the result and offers an alternative. No wasted words.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to clarify the input parameters (0% schema coverage), leaving a significant gap. The differentiation from sibling tools is helpful but not enough to compensate for missing parameter guidance.

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 coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the 'name' or 'slot' parameters. The agent is left to infer their meanings from the tool name alone, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 retrieves the resolved DocumentData for a template without creating a card, and explicitly distinguishes it from create_card and make_template_card, providing specific verb+resource+scope.

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?

It provides clear context by offering alternatives: feed into create_card or use make_template_card to skip boilerplate. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide exclusion criteria.

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