e2b_get_template

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description doesn't state what happens when a template doesn't exist, whether any side effects occur, or what fields get returned. The presence of 'limit' and 'nextToken' suggests the operation may return a list of builds, but the description does not explicitly state what the return payload looks like.

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 six-word description is brief but not intentionally concise — it's just under-specified, similar to calling a one-sentence paragraph about a feature 'short'. There's no structure or front-loading problem because there's barely any content to structure. Efficient at zero cost.

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?

Completely inadequate for an API call that takes 3 parameters with no output schema and no annotations to lean on. An agent has no way to know what a template ID looks like, whether this is a 'list with pagination' or 'get one' call given limit/nextToken, or what a 'build' object is. The template/build domain model is entirely opaque.

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 0% — all three parameters (limit, nextToken, templateId) are entirely undocumented. The description makes no effort to compensate; it fails to clarify what templateId refers to, where to find it, or how limit and nextToken fit into the 'get template' flow. The interplay between fetching a single template and paginating a collection is not resolved.

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?

'Get a template and its builds' names the verb and resource with only slightly more specificity than the function name. The phrase 'and its builds' is the one useful addition, signaling this operation also retrieves related build artifacts. However, it does not distinguish this from the sibling e2b_get_template_by_alias, and lacks context on what a 'template' or 'build' represents.

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 usage guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives. The sibling tool e2b_get_template_by_alias rightfully raises the question of when to fetch by ID versus alias, yet the description is silent on this distinction.

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