get_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the key behavioral detail that the tool returns the template's HTML content, which is useful. However, it does not mention potential errors, authorization requirements, or any other side effects. For a simple read-only GET, this is adequate but not rich.

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 one short sentence (9 words) and is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place—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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and clear sibling context, the description completely covers the essentials: what it operates on and what it returns (HTML content). It could mention that it returns other template fields, but that is not necessary for basic invocation. Suitable for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (template_id with type and description). The description adds no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already states. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 action ('Get') and the specific resource ('a specific template') with a distinctive detail ('with its HTML content'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_templates (list) and create/update/delete, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Usage context is implied via 'specific template' and the presence of list_templates as a sibling, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusion criteria. It meets the baseline for implied usage.

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