Create ZeptoMail template

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

Annotations already convey that this is a write, non-idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those hints: the agentKey must come from a fresh list call, server writes must be enabled, and confirm=true is required. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 a single dense sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and immediately states the most important prerequisites and safety requirements. Every clause 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?

For a mutating tool with no output schema and sparse parameter documentation, the description includes the critical preconditions to avoid mis-keying an Agent. However, it omits any guidance on the remaining parameters, expected response behavior, or duplicate-template handling, so it is only minimally complete.

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 only 13%, so the description must compensate. It does helpfully explain agentKey, expectedAgentName, and confirm usage, but leaves templateName, subject, htmlBody, textBody, and templateAlias entirely to name-based inference. This is adequate but not thorough for an 8-parameter tool.

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 clear verb-resource pair: create a template, and identifies the target scope as a specific ZeptoMail Agent. It is distinguishable from the list/get/update/delete siblings, though the phrase 'one explicit Agent' is slightly awkward and could be clearer.

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 gives concrete invocation prerequisites: obtain agentKey and expectedAgentName from a fresh zeptomail_list_agents call, ensure server writes are enabled, and set confirm=true. It does not explicitly contrast this with zeptomail_update_template, but the prerequisites and confirmation gate provide strong usage direction.

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