Get Advanced Scenarios template

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description merely repeats the 'get' nature without adding any additional behavioral context (e.g., what details are returned, whether the template must exist, or any prerequisites). The description does not contradict annotations but also adds no transparency beyond them.

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, short sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. No superfluous words or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple getter with no output schema and one parameter, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what constitutes 'details', what the response looks like, or how to use template_id. Sibling tools with similar names could confuse an agent without further context on 'Advanced Scenarios'.

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 only parameter, template_id, is defined in the schema with just a type and minLength. The description mentions 'a specific' template, implying template_id identifies the template, but does not explain how to obtain the ID, its format, or its relationship to other resources. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not.

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 states the action ('Get details') and the resource ('a specific Advanced Scenarios template'), which clearly identifies what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling template getters by specifying 'Advanced Scenarios', but does not elaborate on what Advanced Scenarios are or how this differs from similarly named 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cymulate_advanced_list_templates or other template getters. The description gives no context for when a user should call this specific getter instead of a list or another category's getter.

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