Get Prompt Templates

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about whether the call is read-only, whether all templates are returned or paginated, whether results are scoped to a project, or what the response shape looks like. The examples explain template content but not tool behavior.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by illustrative examples. Nothing is wasted, though the second sentence spends space on examples rather than on behavior an agent needs.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what the resource is but not what comes back or how it should be consumed. An agent can call it correctly but cannot predict the response, leaving a clear gap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to add and the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not mislead about inputs, though it also does not clarify that the call is unfiltered and returns everything.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Retrieve reusable prompt templates') plus the source system ('SystemDox Standards'), and the examples clarify what a template is. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling create_prompt_template or the other get_* retrieval tools, so it falls 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 by 'preconfigured prompts that Gen AI should use when generating content,' which tells the agent the templates are meant as generation aids. There is no explicit when-to-call guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of how this differs from list_skills or get_specs, which an agent may confuse it with.

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