Create a template view file at a given path, auto-creating the module folder if it doesn't exist, and save it to the templates directory.
Create a template view by the same path load and save speak: templates//units//.htm. The module folder is created if it is missing.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v6.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose one side effect—creating the module folder if missing—but does not explain overwrite behavior, error conditions, required permissions, or what happens on success. This is a meaningful but incomplete disclosure.
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 short, but the phrase 'by the same path load and save speak' is awkward and unclear, likely a typo or poor phrasing. It contains useful information in two sentences, but one sentence wastes the agent's attention on confusing wording.
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 one-parameter create operation, the description provides the path format and a key side effect../ But it lacks guidance on conflict/overwrite behavior, return values, and when this tool is appropriate compared to sibling tools. It is minimally usable but has clear gaps.
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 coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning to the lone 'path' parameter. It does so by specifying the path template 'templates/<t>/units/<module>/<view>.htm', which defines the expected structure and file extension. However, the placeholders <t>, <module>, and <view> are not explicitly defined.
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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'template view', and provides a concrete path pattern. It is distinguishable from siblings like engine_html_save and engine_html_load, though the phrase 'by the same path load and save speak' is confusing and weakens clarity.
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 implies this tool is used to create a new template view and notes that the module folder is auto-created, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus engine_html_save, engine_static_add, or other add tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.