create_template

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

Annotations already indicate it's a write operation (readOnlyHint false). The description adds meaningful context: the created template has type 'user', active boolean, date_created, and the HTML must be valid with inline CSS and merge tags. However, it does not discuss error conditions or prerequisites beyond the schema.

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?

Well-structured with a concise summary, usage instructions, parameter list, and return description. No unnecessary text; front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (implied by return description) and annotations, the description covers the essential workflow, parameters, and return value. Missing documentation for the 'account' parameter and no guidance on error handling, but otherwise complete.

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 description provides clear explanations for name, html, and folder_id parameters, including examples and constraints. However, the 'account' parameter is not documented in the description, leaving a gap despite schema description coverage of 0%.

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 it creates a reusable email template from HTML content, distinguishes from sibling tools like set_campaign_content (for one-off emails) and mentions get_template_default_content and list_templates for related operations.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (save HTML designs for reuse), when not to use (for one-off emails, use set_campaign_content), and provides workflow context (retrieve HTML later with get_template_default_content, browse with list_templates).

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