thincms_template_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It describes a read operation ('Get'), but the 'confirmProductionWrite' parameter suggests the tool may perform writes, which contradicts the description's implication. The tool's actual side effects (read vs write) are unclear. It also does not mention authentication requirements or rate limits.

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 concise: three sentences, front-loaded with the main action. No unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given 5 parameters (all optional, but no output schema), the description covers the main purpose and comparison feature. However, it fails to address the presence of the 'confirmProductionWrite' parameter, which contradicts the read-only implication. This gap reduces completeness for safe agent invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by explaining the comparison use case ('verify a push landed correctly') but does not elaborate on parameter specifics beyond what the schema already provides. The schema descriptions are already detailed (e.g., siteId override, confirmProductionWrite purpose).

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 it retrieves template stats (hash, byte size, line count) for each field and optionally compares against local files. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like thincms_get_template (which likely returns the full template object). The verb 'Get' and resource 'current template's stats' are specific.

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 provides a clear use case: 'verify a push landed correctly' by comparing with local files. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. Since the purpose is specialized, the usage context is adequately implied.

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