cigchat_describe_fb_utility_template

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

The description discloses the tool's behavior by stating it returns variable keys, namespace, and language, and implies a read-only lookup. However, it does not cover edge cases like behavior when the template name is not found, error handling, or authentication requirements, which would be useful given no annotations are provided.

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 two sentences with an endpoint reference, front-loading the primary purpose and then providing usage guidance. Every sentence contributes value with no filler.

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 lookup tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return contents (variable keys, namespace, language) and the critical usage context. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 full coverage with the 'name' parameter described as 'Exact template name as approved in cig.chat.' The description's mention of lookup 'by name' adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 looks up a Facebook utility message template by name and returns the variable keys, namespace, and language. This specific verb+resource distinguishes it from sibling describe tools like cigchat_describe_whatsapp_template and send/broadcast 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 explicitly instructs to call this before cigchat_send_fb_utility_template or cigchat_broadcast_fb_utility_template_by_tag, explaining that incorrect or missing keys lead to rejection and expensive broadcast failures. This provides clear when-to-use guidance with named alternatives.

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