prompt_get

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 adds the behavioral detail that templates contain variable placeholders, but it does not describe the response format, error behavior, or explicitly state read-only semantics (though the verb 'Get' implies it). This meets a minimum viable level for a simple retrieval tool.

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 that is concise and front-loaded, stating the core function immediately. No redundant or excessive 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?

The tool has only one parameter and no output schema. The description clarifies the purpose and mentions placeholders, which hints at the return content, but it does not specify the full response structure or any special behaviors. For a simple get operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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%, with templateId described as 'Template ID from prompt_list'. The description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 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 gets a specific prompt template, using the verb 'Get' with a specific resource. 'Specific' distinguishes it from prompt_list (which lists templates) and prompt_generate (which probably creates a prompt), and 'with variable placeholders' adds a unique characteristic.

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 itself does not explicitly state when to use this tool, but the parameter description 'Template ID from prompt_list' provides a clear prerequisite and cross-tool reference, implying that prompt_list should be used first to obtain the ID. This gives useful contextual guidance, though no exclusions are mentioned.

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