get_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden; 'Get' weakly implies a read-only, side-effect-free operation and 'body content' discloses something about the return payload. It says nothing about permission requirements, behavior for a missing or deleted template ID, or the response structure, which matters since there is no output schema.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word contributes: the action, the resource, and the notable inclusion of body content.

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 one-parameter getter with a fully described schema this is close to adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should say what a template contains (subject, HTML/text body, variables) and what happens when the ID is unknown.

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 single parameter is fully documented in the schema ('id' as a Template UUID) at 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, sourcing, or lookup guidance for the ID beyond what the schema already states.

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 a template') and adds scope detail ('including its body content') that separates it from list_templates, which would not return bodies. It never names a sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is implicit rather than stated.

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 single-template retrieval is implied by the name and by 'including its body content', hinting at use when the full body is needed rather than a summary listing. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion of list_templates, and no mention of prerequisites such as a valid template ID.

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