render_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the ${VAR} substitution format and the auto-provided variables (DATE, TIMESTAMP, USER, YEAR), which is useful, but it does not explain behavior for missing variables, precedence over user-supplied values, or error conditions.

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 three short sentences, starting with the core purpose and then adding format and auto-provided variables. Every sentence contributes new information without excess verbiage.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description captures the main function and variable behavior, but it leaves the return value implicit (rendered text) and does not cover edge cases like missing variables or conflicts with auto-provided names. Adequate but with noticeable gaps.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents both parameters and their composition. The description adds the substitution syntax but no per-parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 opens with 'Render a template with variable substitution,' a specific verb and object that clearly defines the action. This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_template and list_templates, which fetch or list rather than produce a substituted output.

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 usage: use this tool when you need a template rendered with variables. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives (e.g., get_template for the raw template source), leaving the distinction to inference.

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