describe_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the return format and input constraints, but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or has side effects. However, the description is sufficiently transparent about what the tool does.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear first sentence stating purpose, followed by usage guidelines, input instructions, and a list of return values. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description provides complete context including inputs, outputs (matching the output schema), and when to use it. It adequately differentiates from sibling tools.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that either template_path or template_b64+template_filename can be used, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not define each parameter's semantics, so the compensation is partial.

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's purpose as a one-call summary of a template's overall shape, listing specific outputs like page count and target counts. It also differentiates from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning when to use list_template_targets instead.

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 includes explicit 'USE WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN' sections, providing clear guidance on when to use the tool and when to use the alternative list_template_targets.

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