get_page_template

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: it states that merged selector validation is applied, and explicitly notes that fixed/flexible roles and allowedTokens are advisory-only labels, not enforced. Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so this extra caveat is valuable.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and subject, then a compact caveat about advisory metadata. No filler or repetition of schema/annotation details.

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 read-only single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is read (template slots), where it is read from (active grab session's DESIGN.md), and the key behavioral nuance (selector validation merge and advisory-only roles). Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 already provides complete coverage for the only parameter 'page' with a clear description. The tool description does not add parameter-specific detail, but it does contextualize that the page is evaluated within the active grab session's DESIGN.md. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the semantic load.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and identifies a specific resource: page-scoped template slots from the active grab session's DESIGN.md. The mention of merging overlay selector validation further narrows behavior, distinguishing it from siblings like read_design_md or list_templates.

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 establishes a clear usage context: read page-scoped template slots tied to the active grab session. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent can infer when this tool applies.

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