Get Public Template

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

Annotations already cover key traits (read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description adds minimal value by stating 'No authentication required.' This provides some context beyond annotations, but doesn't elaborate on rate limits, error handling, or response format, keeping it at an adequate level.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes essential context ('No authentication required'). There is no wasted wording, making it highly concise and well-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 simple tool with one parameter, high schema coverage, and annotations covering safety, the description is mostly complete. It lacks details on output format or error cases, but for a read-only public tool, this is a minor gap, not critical for basic use.

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 100%, with the parameter 'template_id' fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any extra meaning or examples for the parameter, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 ('Get') and resource ('public template's details'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'dual_get_template' or 'dual_public_list_templates', which would require mentioning specific scope or output differences for a perfect score.

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 provides clear context with 'No authentication required,' which helps distinguish it from authenticated tools. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the authentication guidance is valuable for usage decisions.

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