MCP Prompt Manager

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

create-prompt-from-template

Creates a prompt file from a template by substituting user-defined variables. Eliminates manual prompt creation by reusing structured templates.

Instructions

Create a new prompt file from a template with variables

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "templateId": "<templateId>",
      "filename": "<filename>",
      "variables": "<variables>"
    },
    "name": "create-prompt-from-template"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`filename`	Yes	Filename for the new prompt
`variables`	Yes	Variables to use in template rendering
`templateId`	Yes	Template ID to use
`addMetadata`	No	Whether to add template metadata (default: true)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses creation and template rendering but omits side effects, authorization needs, error conditions, or what happens to existing files.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with key action. Could be more structured, but no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 4 parameters (including nested object), no output schema, and many siblings, the description is incomplete. Missing return value, error behavior, and usage context.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds 'template rendering' context but no additional detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool creates a new prompt file from a template with variables. It distinguishes from generic 'create-prompt' by specifying template usage, but does not explicitly differentiate among siblings like 'render-template' or 'process-template'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create-prompt' or 'process-template'. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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