templates_modify

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

The description adds useful context beyond annotations: it clarifies that the operation does not change the snapshot, and it mentions the permission requirement. Annotations already indicate readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=true, and the description aligns with these without contradiction.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose, a requires line, an alternative tool reference, and a returns line. No wasted words, all sentences earn their place.

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 description is complete for a modification tool: purpose, permission requirement, alternative tool, and return value. With annotations and output schema available, it covers all necessary context without redundancy.

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%, with each parameter already described. The description only mentions 'name and/or description' which maps to the schema but adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool updates a Guild Template's name and/or description without changing its snapshot. This specific verb-resource pairing and the explicit 'without changing its snapshot' scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like templates_sync.

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?

It explicitly states the required MANAGE_GUILD permission and tells the agent to use templates_sync when the source guild layout changed, providing a clear alternative for a different scenario.

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