apply_template

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions returning an inline thumbnail when include_preview is True, but does not disclose side effects like file output behavior or whether the original is modified. Missing key behavioral details for a processing tool.

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 concise sentences plus a parameter list. The list is somewhat redundant but helpful. Front-loaded with purpose. Could be slightly more concise by integrating parameter details.

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?

With 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It explains only a few parameters and omits details on defaults, behavior of output_dir, preview_max_width, and return values beyond the thumbnail.

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%. The description adds meaning for template_name (built-in or custom), device_preset (crop/resize), and include_preview (returns thumbnail). Other parameters like file_path, output_format, output_dir, preview_max_width lack explanation.

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 applies a PP3 template to a RAW file for quick processing with a predefined style. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'apply_local_preset' or 'apply_lut' by focusing on full templates.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this for quick processing with a predefined style', providing a clear when-to-use. However, it does not mention when not to use or contrast with alternative tools like 'process_raw'.

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