get_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool retrieves a template with subject and body in various formats, but does not mention any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or behavior on invalid ids. The lack of depth is acceptable for a simple read operation but could be improved.

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 that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly concise and easy to parse.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is adequate but not complete. It lacks details on the structure of the returned body (e.g., how multiple formats are provided), error cases, or permissions. For a tool with sibling tools like preview_template, more context on differentiation would improve completeness.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'id', described as 'The template id.' The description adds that the returned template includes subject and body, which adds context beyond the schema but does not provide additional parameter-level semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'one saved template', and specifies what is included (subject and body in html/text/mjml). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_templates and preview_template by focusing on a single template retrieval with full content.

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 implies usage when a single template's full content is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like preview_template or list_templates. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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