mailkite_create_template

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

With no meaningful annotations beyond readOnlyHint=false, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully discloses the management session token requirement and the two mutation modes, but it does not mention side effects, ownership semantics of cloned templates, or what the call returns. That is adequate but not fully transparent.

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, front-loaded with the core action, then mode alternatives, then the auth requirement. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 7-parameter tool with zero required parameters and complete schema documentation, the description covers the critical decision (baseId vs fields) and the auth precondition. It does not describe return values, but that is a minor gap given the absence of an output schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description lists the relevant fields by mode but adds no semantics beyond the schema, such as validation rules, format expectations, or relationships between parameters.

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 names the specific operation—creating a template—and clearly distinguishes the two intended paths: cloning via baseId or supplying content fields directly. This makes it easy for an agent to tell it apart from sibling list/get template operations.

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 gives clear situational guidance: use baseId to clone a base template, or provide name/subject/html/text/theme directly. It also notes the management session token requirement. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives such as mailkite_list_base_templates or stating when not to use this tool, but the mode-based guidance is strong.

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