template_survey_management

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It doesn't indicate which actions are read-only versus destructive, what permissions are required, or how errors are handled. The description mentions 'handles' but doesn't clarify the behavioral implications of different actions like 'delete_job_template' versus 'list_job_templates'.

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 appropriately concise with just two sentences. It's front-loaded with the main purpose statement. However, the second sentence could be more specific about what 'handles' entails to improve clarity without sacrificing brevity.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters, multiple action types) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It should provide more context about the tool's scope and behavioral characteristics since annotations are absent. The description doesn't help users understand when to choose specific actions or how different actions relate to each other.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema descriptions. It doesn't explain relationships between parameters or provide examples of valid parameter combinations. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the comprehensive schema 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 states it 'handles job templates, workflow templates, and survey specifications' which gives a general purpose but lacks specificity about what 'handles' means. It doesn't distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'create_workflow_survey' or 'workflow_automation_management' that might have overlapping functionality. The description is vague about the actual operations performed.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention any prerequisites, context for selection, or differentiation from sibling tools like 'create_workflow_survey' or 'workflow_automation_management'. Users must infer usage from the action parameter alone.

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