get_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and 'Get' usefully signals a read-only retrieval rather than a mutation. Still, it does not disclose error behavior, permissions, or what 'full' means in terms of response contents, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 short sentence with no filler. The core action and key parameter are front-loaded, making it immediately scannable for an agent.

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 one-parameter read operation, the description is minimally adequate, but with no output schema and no annotations it does not clarify the full response shape, possible errors, or how this relates to sibling tools like list_templates. The agent can invoke it but may not know exactly what to expect.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the schema's minimal parameter documentation. It only refers to 'ID' without explaining the format, source, or expected meaning of templateId, adding little beyond the schema's name and type.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('template') with a clear parameter ('by ID'), and the phrase 'full template' distinguishes it from list_templates or create_template. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does and how it differs from sibling tools.

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 the tool: when you have a template ID and need the full template. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives such as list_templates or search_assets, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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