sdcloud_preview_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately states that the tool returns a job id (indicating asynchronous operation) and requires polling. It does not mention error handling, permissions, or prerequisites, but the core behavior (non-destructive preview) is transparently described.

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 a single sentence (effectively two clauses) that front-loads the purpose and immediately states the output and next step. Every word is necessary; there is no redundancy or fluff. It is an excellent example of conciseness.

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 tool's simplicity (preview, no output schema), the description covers the essential elements: what it does, what it returns, and how to follow up. It references the polling tool by name, which helps the agent chain calls. It could mention that the preview result is retrieved via the status tool, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an async preview tool.

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 input schema has 2 required parameters with only 50% coverage (body has a description, template_id lacks one). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema: it doesn't explain what template_id represents or provide details for the body parameter (e.g., structure, examples). Thus, it fails to compensate for the schema's gaps.

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's purpose: 'Preview the configuration a template deployment would produce.' It uses a specific verb ('Preview') and resource ('template deployment configuration'), and distinguishes from siblings like sdcloud_deploy_template and sdcloud_validate_template by focusing on preview rather than execution or validation.

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?

The description provides immediate guidance on how to use the result: 'Returns a job id; poll sdcloud_get_template_preview_status for progress.' This tells the agent what to do after invoking. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., when preview is needed before deployment) or include any exclusion criteria, so it's not a full guidelines set.

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