create_from_template

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

The description clearly discloses that this creates a session and that the resulting session contains a structured plan plus rules, which goes beyond a generic create verb. However, with no annotations at all, it does not address behaviors such as whether creation is idempotent, what happens if the template id is invalid, or what the response contains. The core side effect is clear, but the full operational burden is not covered.

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 compact and well structured with a one-line summary, trigger bullets, workflow positioning, and a parameter list. There is almost no filler, and the most useful routing information appears near the top. The parameter list duplicates schema names but adds value through examples and defaults.

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 create tool, it gives enough to make a reasonable call with known templates and example values. But it does not mention what the tool returns, how to discover valid templates, or what happens on failure. Given no output schema and no annotations, a sentence pointing to list_templates or describing the returned session would make this materially more complete.

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 parameter list in the description is the main semantic source. It describes every parameter, gives example values for template_id, and notes the default for created_by. The main limitation is that it does not point to list_templates or get_template for discovering valid template identifiers or explain constraints on title and task_description.

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: creating a session from a predefined template, and distinguishes it from create_session by emphasizing the structured plan and rules. The examples of common workflows reinforce the purpose. This is a specific verb+resource pairing, not a tautology.

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 provides explicit automatic triggers with concrete conditions for when to call this tool, such as when the user asks for a template session or when a pre-built plan is preferred. It also names create_session as the alternative and gives the workflow-selection criterion: use this when a structured plan is desired. This gives clear guidance for tool selection.

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