preview_email_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-like operation (rendering a preview) but does not disclose potential side effects, rate limits, or error handling. The safety profile is partially clear but lacks explicit non-destructive statement.

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 concise sentence with no verbose or redundant phrasing. It effectively captures the core functionality in minimal words.

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 the lack of output schema, the description does not specify what the preview returns (e.g., HTML string, URL). It also omits error scenarios or expected response format, making it incomplete for an AI agent to understand the tool's output.

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 33%, only 'context' has a description. The description adds meaning to 'context' by noting it is optional and for sample variable substitution. However, 'project_id' and 'slug' are not elaborated beyond the schema, though their names are self-explanatory.

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 action ('Render a preview'), the resource ('an email template'), and the optional feature ('with optional sample context variables'). It effectively differentiates from siblings like 'send_test_email' (which actually sends) and 'get_email_template' (which retrieves without rendering).

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 implies usage for previewing templates with optional context but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'send_test_email' or 'get_email_template'. No guidance on prerequisites or 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.