LightCMS

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

Adds valuable return payload context ('full template including fields and HTML layout') beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. Confirms this retrieves complete object data, not just metadata. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence defines operation and lookup keys; second sentence describes return payload. Front-loaded with essential information, no redundancy with title or schema.

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?

Appropriate for a simple 2-parameter retrieval tool. Compensates for missing output schema by describing return structure ('fields and HTML layout'). With readOnlyHint annotation present, no need for safety warnings.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description mentions 'ID or slug' which implies alternative identifiers, but doesn't add syntax details, format constraints, or explicit mutual exclusivity guidance beyond what the schema property descriptions already provide.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Get') + resource ('template') + scope ('single' vs sibling 'list_templates'). The ID/slug specification distinguishes from bulk operations and the 'fields and HTML layout' distinguishes from metadata-only retrieval tools.

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?

Implies usage by mentioning 'by ID or slug' but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs 'list_templates' (browse/search vs direct lookup) and doesn't clarify that ID and slug are mutually exclusive lookup methods (both marked optional in schema).

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