get_config_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates the tool returns template content and metadata, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it describe error behavior (e.g., invalid template name). The return description adds some transparency but not rich 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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, followed by Args and Returns. Every sentence serves a purpose with no unnecessary filler. It is front-loaded with the main action and clearly structured.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough for correct usage. It includes return details and examples. It does not mention potential edge cases or the relationship with sibling tools, but these are not critical for a getter.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by providing concrete examples of template_name ('baremetal-ipi-compact', 'baremetal-ipi-ha'). This adds practical meaning beyond the bare schema and helps the agent construct valid inputs.

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 gets an install-config template, with a specific verb ('Get') and resource. It is distinguishable from siblings like list_config_templates, which lists templates, and generate_install_config, which creates one. The Args section reinforces the purpose by showing the template_name parameter.

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: you need a template by name, and examples are provided. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_config_templates or generate_install_config. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but for a simple getter, implied usage is acceptable.

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