getEmailTemplate

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.), description reveals that email_body is stripped by default and how to retrieve it, describes the return format as an array within a success object, and mentions HTTP 404 for not found. This adds significant behavioral detail not present in annotations alone.

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 extremely concise, using bold headers and bullet points to organize critical information. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the most important details (read-only, required param, lean default) are front-loaded.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully explains the return structure and edge cases (empty/404). Combined with annotations and sibling references, it provides complete context for a simple get-by-id tool. No gaps remain.

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?

Description adds meaning beyond schema: it explains that include_body=1 is needed for editing and that email_body is the heaviest field. Though schema already covers include_body, the description reinforces its purpose and adds context about default behavior. email_id is simply noted as required, not adding much beyond schema, but overall useful.

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 'Get a single email template - Fetch a single emailtemplate record. Read-only.' It explicitly contrasts with 'listEmailTemplates (enumerate many)', distinguishing the tool from siblings. The verb 'get' and resource 'email template' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

Includes 'Use when: fetching one template's HTML body and subject for edit.' and 'Required: email_id.' It also advises when to set include_body=1 and references the alternative listEmailTemplates for enumeration, providing clear usage context and when-not-to-use.

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