template_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds useful scope detail that the call returns the full workflow plus README, but says nothing about behavior such as not-found handling, version resolution, or payload size.

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. Every word contributes to identifying the resource and the lookup key.

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 one-parameter read tool whose annotations already cover safety, the description is largely sufficient, and it usefully states what is returned. With no output schema, slightly more about the return shape (e.g. that it includes raw workflow JSON plus README text) would make it fully self-contained.

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 coverage is 0% and the schema only names the field 'id' with type string. The description supplies the otherwise-missing semantic that the identifier is a UUID, which is genuine added value over the schema. It still omits format details, but this compensates well for the single undocumented parameter.

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?

Specific verb ('Retrieve') plus resource ('template workflow and README') and lookup key ('by UUID'). The 'by UUID' framing implicitly separates it from the sibling template_search, though it never names that alternative. An agent can tell roughly what it does without opening the schema.

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 no explicit when-to-use guidance and no named alternative, even though template_search is an obvious sibling for finding templates. The only indirect signal is 'by UUID', implying the caller must already know the identifier.

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