Show Checklist Template

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description confirms it returns a JSON object, aligning with readOnly. However, it does not explain the presence of pagination parameters (page, per_page) in the schema, which could be confusing for a single-template retrieval.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage hint, required params, and API endpoint. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 show tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, required params, and API reference. However, it does not address the pagination parameters (page, per_page) in the schema, leaving a minor gap in 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% coverage for all 4 parameters. The description redundantly lists required parameters (id, project_id) but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score 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 tool shows a single Inspection Checklist Template by identifier. However, it refers to 'Inspections' (plural) which is a minor inconsistency. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools by specifying fetching full details of a specific 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?

The description implies use when you have the template ID and project ID, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like list_checklist_templates. The context signals show many related list/show tools, but no exclusion guidance is provided.

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