Get template

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered without needing repetition. The description adds useful response-content context but doesn't disclose other behavioral details such as error behavior, empty results, or output wrapping. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first gives the result shape, the second gives usage. No filler, and the most important scoping information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter, read-only tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what is returned and when to use it. An agent has enough to select and call the tool correctly without missing critical context.

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 sole parameter template_fingerprint is fully documented in the schema with type, pattern, and description, giving 100% schema description coverage. The description references the template conceptually but adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states that the tool returns a single template and itemizes its payload: parties with party_id/name and merge fields with field_id/label. 'One template' plus the title conveys retrieval, and the detail level distinguishes it from list_templates, though it never uses an explicit verb like 'gets' or 'retrieves'.

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?

It gives concrete placement in a workflow: 'Use this before send_envelope_from_template.' This tells an agent when to call it. It doesn't explicitly contrast it with siblings like list_templates or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full alternative guidance.

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