seed_starter_templates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'baked-in anchors' but does not disclose whether this is destructive (e.g., overwrites existing templates), if authentication is required, or any rate limits. For a mutation tool, more transparency is needed.

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 sentence of 14 words, front-loading the key purpose and examples. No unnecessary words; each part earns its place.

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?

The tool has no output schema and zero parameters. The description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., template IDs or status) or any side effects. For a seeding action, the agent would benefit from knowing the outcome.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description does not need to explain parameters, and it adds value by naming the sample templates. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 seeds sample templates with specific examples (test envelope, simple NDA, one-page agreement) and mentions baked-in anchors, distinguishing it from create_template which likely creates blank templates. However, the verb 'seed' is somewhat vague and could be more explicit about action (e.g., 'create sample 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_template or create_envelope_from_template. It is implied for testing or demo purposes, but no explicit context or exclusions are given.

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