get_template_fields

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, confirming idempotency. Description adds that it returns field/variable info but does not disclose any potential errors, pagination, or detailed response structure. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate.

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?

Single sentence containing essential information. No redundancy, front-loaded with purpose and usage hint. Very efficient.

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 (1 parameter, no output schema, readOnly annotations), the description covers purpose and usage context. It could mention that the output is a list of variable names, but the current description is sufficient for a minimal viable definition.

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 only parameter, template_uuid, is not described in the description despite 0% schema coverage. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description should at least mention it expects a template UUID. The description references 'una plantilla' implicitly but doesn't explicitly map to 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves fields/variables of a template, and explicitly relates it to send_template, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_templates or send_template itself.

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?

Description says 'útil antes de enviar con send_template y body_vars', which tells when to use this tool (before sending a template). It implies a specific workflow step but does not provide when-not-to-use or explicit alternatives.

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