resolve_template_decoration

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden; it does disclose the important Pro-tier gating requirement and that defaults are merged with overrides. However it never states whether this is a read-only computation or a persisted mutation, whether existing template decorations are overwritten, or what the resolution result contains.

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 useful content is one front-loaded sentence; the remaining three sentences are marketing upsell copy and a promotional URL that add no invocation guidance and dilute the signal.

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 7-parameter, no-output-schema, no-annotation tool, the description covers purpose and tier gating but omits the merge semantics (precedence rules, error conditions when Pro is absent) that an agent needs to call it confidently.

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 86%, so the schema already documents the seven parameters (though only with bare default values). The description adds only the abstract notion of 'overrides' mapped to 'profile defaults' and does not clarify face/mode/scale/depth_mm/image_style meaning.

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 first sentence names a specific verb ('resolve') and resource ('decoration settings for a template') plus the core mechanism ('merging profile defaults with overrides'). It is distinguishable from siblings like save_decoration or apply_decoration, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

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 statement of when to call this versus alternatives such as decoration_info, list_decoration_presets, or apply_decoration, and no prerequisites (e.g. must the template already exist? must overrides be validated first?). The only conditional given is a billing-tier gate, not usage guidance.

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