read_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly describes a read-only action, but does not mention path constraints, error behavior, or whether the raw template content is returned. The output schema helps with return value expectations, but behavioral details remain minimal.

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 sentence plus an illustrative example. It is appropriately short and front-loaded, with no filler or redundant information.

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 an output schema, the description plus example is nearly sufficient. The main gap is not indicating where valid template paths originate, such as from list_templates, and not explicitly distinguishing this from read_note.

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%, so the description must compensate for the single 'path' parameter. The example '.zennotes/templates/adr.md' adds useful meaning about expected path format and location, but it does not clarify whether the path is vault-relative, whether extensions are required, or whether other template locations are allowed.

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 the specific action 'Lit un template' (reads a template) and gives an example path, clearly identifying both the verb and the resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_templates, write_template, and delete_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?

No guidance is given on when to use read_template versus alternatives such as list_templates or read_note. The example path provides some context, but there are no explicit usage conditions, exclusions, or references to sibling tools.

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