get_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the tool is a read operation ('Get') and the core output behavior ('task list with durations'), but does not cover failure behavior, data freshness, or whether the returned template is a mutable copy.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, specifies the returned content, and names the intended next step. Every phrase contributes information; there is 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 one-parameter tool with fully described schema, the description tells the agent what is retrieved, what it contains, and how it should be used next. The workflow connection to list_templates and create_gantt is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 100%: the only parameter, slug, is already described as a 'Template slug from list_templates'. The description adds 'by slug' but not new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get one industry template by slug', and clarifies the result is 'its task list with durations'. It also differentiates from list_templates by emphasizing 'one' template, and points to create_gantt as the downstream consumer.

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 phrase 'by slug' combined with the schema note 'Template slug from list_templates' establishes when to use this tool: after listing templates and before creating a gantt. It does not explicitly state exclusions, but the intended workflow is clear.

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