Save CAD templates to a centralized organization library with categorization and version control, so teams can reuse standardized designs.
Save template to the organization's template library.
This tool manages a centralized template library with categorization and version control.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| input_data | Yes | The input data value. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions categorization and version control but does not disclose side effects like overwriting behavior, required permissions, or error states. Minimal transparency for a mutation tool.
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 concise sentences efficiently convey the core function and additional features without unnecessary detail.
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?
The presence of an output schema is noted, but the tool has a vague input parameter and lacks details about template format, library structure, or behavior under edge cases. Given the opaque parameter, the description is incomplete for reliable invocation.
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 single parameter 'input_data' has a vague schema description ('The input data value.') and the tool description adds only generic context about categorization and version control. The schema coverage is 100% but the descriptions are insufficient to fully understand the expected structure.
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?
Clearly states the action: 'Save template to the organization's template library.' It also adds context about management, categorization, and version control, distinguishing it from siblings like 'save_file' and 'create_template.'
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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The name and description imply usage for saving templates to a library, but there are no when-not-to-use indications or mention of sibling tools for comparison.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.