Describe Command Template

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

The description is consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true) and the verb 'get' implies read-only behavior. However, it adds no extra context beyond what annotations already provide—no mention of error cases, return value details, or special conditions. Given the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence of nine words, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

The tool has a simple signature (2 params, no nested objects) and an output schema that defines return values. The description, while minimal, is enough for a basic read-only describe operation. It does not explain differences from analogous 'describe_template' or 'get_command_templates', but the output schema and annotations cover most necessary context.

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%, with both 'name' and 'project' having clear descriptions. The tool description itself does not add any additional parameter 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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Get detailed information about a specific command template.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_command_templates' (listing) and 'create/update/run_command_template' by emphasizing 'specific' and 'detailed information.'

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of using it for one template versus 'get_command_templates' for listing, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The intended usage is only implied by the word 'specific.'

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