get_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-like operation ('Get') and notes that the response includes 'full definition including components,' but it does not disclose error behavior, permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal but adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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 concise sentence, front-loads the core purpose, and includes no redundant or unnecessary wording. It earns its place with high information density.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies what is retrieved ('single template by ID') and what the response includes ('full definition including components'). No additional context is needed for an agent to invoke 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 schema description covers 100% of the parameter (template_id with description 'The template ID to retrieve'). The description adds no extra semantic value beyond restating that it fetches by ID, 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 clearly states the tool 'Get a single WhatsApp message template by ID with full definition including components.' It specifies the action (get), the resource (template), the selection method (by ID), and the return content (full definition including components), which distinguishes it from list_templates, create_template, update_template, and delete_template.

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 usage for retrieving a specific template by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over list_templates or mention any alternatives or exclusions. It relies on the verb 'Get' and the resource specificity to convey the intended use case.

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