conduyt_get_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and "Get" implies a safe read. The phrase "with full content" usefully signals it returns more than a listing, but it says nothing about permissions, behavior on an unknown/invalid ID, or whether content includes HTML/plain variants.

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?

A single tight sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no redundant clauses. Nothing can be trimmed without losing meaning.

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?

The tool is simple: one fully documented required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects. The description adequately covers what an agent needs to call it, though it could note error behavior on a missing ID.

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 single `id` parameter is already documented as a "Template UUID." The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb ("Get") and resource ("email or SMS template") and clarifies it returns a single record with full content, which implicitly distinguishes it from conduyt_list_templates. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so it falls 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?

Usage is implied: fetch one template by ID when you need the complete content rather than a summary. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative, leaving routing to inference.

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