get_rule_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it does cover the essentials: 'Access level: read' explicitly declares the read-only nature, and it enumerates the return payload (template, fields, usage). It omits auth/permission needs, rate limits, and any failure behavior, so it 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?

Two short, front-loaded paragraphs: the purpose sentence comes first, followed by compact access/return metadata. Minimal waste, though the returns line partially duplicates the parameter schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required, and the description correctly confines itself to purpose, access level, and the optional-parameter side effect. The only real gap is sibling routing among the three template getters.

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 coverage is 100% and there is only one optional parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description's note that scope_suggestions are returned 'if project_id given' merely restates the schema's own parameter description, adding no meaning beyond structured data.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) and a precisely scoped resource: the canonical `## RN-XXX-NNN` atomic block template plus its field descriptions and usage instructions. This is clearly distinguishable from the other template getters (get_lesson_template, get_transcription_template), though the description never explicitly names them to force the distinction.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The presence of three sibling template getters means an agent must infer from the name alone which template it needs; the description does not route it or state a prerequisite (e.g., 'call before creating a rule').

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