Get PRB template

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the behavior burden alone. It usefully discloses that the returned markdown is placeholder/'blind text' rather than real data, which prevents misuse, but it says nothing about size, whether the content is static, or any side effects (a read-only generator is implied but never stated).

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the purpose ('Return a PRB document template') arrives immediately. The em-dash parenthetical about placeholder content is slightly heavy but still earns its place by clarifying the payload.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not enumerate return values, and it doesn't attempt to. For a zero-parameter template getter it is nearly complete; the only missing piece is disambiguation from get_prb_example and get_prb_template's role in the create/draft workflow.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no input is required to obtain the template.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return a PRB document template ... as raw markdown') and describes the exact payload: frontmatter plus every body field filled with placeholder content. What it does not do is distinguish itself from the sibling get_prb_example, which an agent could easily confuse with a template getter.

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?

There is implied usage ('for use as a starting point when drafting a new problem statement'), which gives some context. However, no alternative is named or excluded — notably get_prb_example and get_prb — and there is no guidance on when a drafting agent should pull the template rather than an existing record or example.

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