save_template

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mention of 'overwrite' adds contextual value by hinting that an existing template may be replaced. However, it does not detail what 'overwrite' entails (e.g., full replacement vs. partial update) or side effects like cascading to drafts using the template.

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 sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

While the tool is relatively simple (3 params, 2 required), the description omits important context such as whether overwriting is an upsert (creates if not exists) or requires a prior get. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but behavioral specifics are missing. Score 3 reflects adequate but not comprehensive completeness.

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%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no new parameter-level information beyond the schema, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already provides adequate context for each parameter.

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 explicitly states the verb 'Create or overwrite' and the resource 'template', making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_template', 'delete_template', 'list_templates', and 'render_template' by focusing on creation/update.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'create_draft' (which uses templates) or 'render_template' (which renders without saving). There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions for overwriting, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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