get_template_schemaGet the JSON Schema and sample data for a template to understand required fields and build valid render data.
JSON Schema of the data object a template expects, plus the sample data it was designed with. Use it to build the data for render.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| template | Yes | Template slug or tpl_ id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile (read-only). The description adds value by disclosing that the tool returns both the JSON schema and the sample data, which is behavioral information beyond the annotation. It does not contradict any annotation.
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 consists of two concise sentences. The first states the core function and output, the second gives a clear usage instruction. Every sentence serves a purpose with no redundancy.
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 tool with one well-documented parameter and a read-only annotation, the description is complete: it explains what the tool returns (schema and sample data) and how to use it (to build data for render). No essential information is missing for an agent to call it 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 already documents the only parameter 'template' with a clear description ('Template slug or tpl_ id'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any extra detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns the JSON Schema of the expected 'data' object for a template, plus sample data. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'render' (which processes data) and 'validate_template' (which checks correctness).
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 tells the agent when to use it: 'Use it to build the data for render.' This gives clear context for the use case. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, leaving a small gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.