update_template

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

No annotations exist, and the description only indicates mutation without disclosing side effects, permissions, reversibility, or impact on associated resources (e.g., campaigns using the template).

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, concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks any structural elements (e.g., bullets) that could improve scanability.

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?

Despite good schema documentation, the description lacks essential behavioral context for a mutation tool (e.g., versioning, effect on existing campaigns). The absence of output schema and annotations further reduces completeness.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already conveys.

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 'Update an existing email template', clearly indicating the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create_template' and 'delete_template', though it doesn't specify which fields can be updated.

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 update versus alternatives (e.g., create, copy). No prerequisites or context about idempotency or versioning are mentioned.

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