update_template

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: runs TemplateValidator unless force=True, returns success status and preview, and explicitly states HTML is never exposed to agent context.

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 well-structured with a clear opening sentence and bullet-style details. It is moderately concise, though some sentences could be tighter.

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 11 parameters (8 required) and no schema descriptions, the description covers key behavioral aspects but lacks detail on parameter semantics. Output schema exists but is not summarized.

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 0%. The description only explains external_template_id, force, and debug. Other required parameters like title, components, template_name, etc. are not described, leaving significant gaps.

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 validates, builds, and updates an existing email template in MoEngage. It uses specific verbs and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like search_templates or create_campaign.

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 explains the prerequisite (obtain external_template_id via search_templates) and provides guidance for optional flags (force=True, debug=True). It implicitly differentiates from alternatives but does not explicitly state when not to use.

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