Fetch a template's compose.yaml to review or edit it before creating a sandbox stack. Specify the template name to inspect the exact Docker Compose configuration.
A template's compose.yaml as written (to show or edit before a create) HTTP GET /templates/{name}
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already establishes this as a safe read, so the description only needs to add context. It contributes the useful nuance that the content is returned verbatim ('as written'), but says nothing about behavior for a nonexistent template or the response shape.
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 compact lines with the resource and its return semantics front-loaded. Every phrase contributes; the raw HTTP verb line is the only mildly redundant element.
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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description conveys what is returned (the compose.yaml) but omits error behavior for missing templates and any hint about the return structure. Adequate but with visible 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% for the single 'name' parameter, so the description must compensate. The HTTP path 'GET /templates/{name}' implies the name identifies the template, but adds no format, case-sensitivity, or lookup rules beyond that inference.
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?
States a specific resource (a template's compose.yaml) and clarifies the exact form returned ('as written'), which is more precise than the sibling list_templates. The verb is implicit in the name rather than stated, keeping it just short of a 5.
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 parenthetical 'to show or edit before a create' implies the intended moment of use, but there is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative (e.g., list_templates for enumeration). Usage is suggested rather than specified.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.