Get smart template by ID

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, but the description itself adds no behavioral context beyond what the title implies. It does not disclose the return format, error behavior for non-existent IDs, or any rate limits or access requirements. The description is essentially a restatement of the title, adding no supplemental transparency.

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, brief sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, but as a concise statement of purpose it is appropriately sized.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, annotations covering read-only), the description could be considered minimally adequate. However, it omits any mention of how to discover a template_id (e.g., via the list sibling), what the response contains, or typical usage scenarios. With many sibling tools for related resources, the lack of contextual linkage reduces completeness.

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 schema shows one required string parameter 'template_id' with no description, and the schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not explain what 'template_id' refers to, where to find it, or any format expectations. While the title says 'by ID', the description text itself does not add semantic meaning to the parameter, leaving the agent to infer from the parameter name alone.

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 title explicitly states 'Get smart template by ID' and the description 'Get a specific EV smart template' clearly identifies the action (get) and resource (EV smart template). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cymulate_ev_smart_templates_list (which lists multiple) and cymulate_ev_smart_templates_create (which creates), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as the list tool. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., obtaining the template_id from the list) or exclude scenarios where this tool is not appropriate. There is no context about when a get-by-ID is preferred over listing.

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