Get the full widget specs for a template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only (returns a blueprint), provides the structure of the return value, and specifies the error condition (404 for unknown id). It could add a note on idempotency or permissions, but the current disclosure is solid.

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: first states the return value with details, second provides usage guidance and error behavior. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no unnecessary words.

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 no output schema, the description details the return structure (id, name, description, icon, widgets array with query+viz+position). It also covers error handling. The sibling tools context shows integration with dashboard_create and widget_create, and the description ties the workflow together. No missing critical information for a simple get-by-id tool.

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% (template_id with description including an example). The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb 'Returns' and the resource 'full blueprint for a template', listing concrete fields (id, name, description, icon, widgets array). It distinguishes from siblings by noting to use this to fetch the recipe before calling dashboard_create and widget_create.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use this to fetch the recipe, then call dashboard_create + a widget_create per item to materialize it') and mentions the 404 error for unknown template ids. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the workflow context is clear.

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