get_template

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: the output is automatically stored, a preview with an object ID is returned, and the ID can be used with object store tools or passed to other functions. This goes beyond just 'fetches template' and aids the agent in understanding the return format and side effects.

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: main purpose first, then param explanation, return behavior, and usage tips. The docstring-style formatting is clear, and each sentence adds value. Slight room for improvement by front-loading more critical info.

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 simple get-template tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter, return value (including object ID utility), and error handling (indicated by 'error message'). This is sufficiently complete for the complexity level.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides a basic docstring for the only parameter, 'template_name', stating 'The name of the template to fetch.' This adds meaning beyond the schema (which only gives title and type), but lacks details on format, allowed values, or constraints.

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 explicitly states the action ('Fetches detailed information') and the resource ('specific pipeline or indexing template'), identified by a unique name. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_templates or search_templates.

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 implies when to use this tool (to get details of a single template by name), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives (e.g., list_templates for listing, search_templates for searching). No direct comparison to siblings.

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