get_template

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that the tool returns EmailContent JSON, but it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential side effects (none expected), error handling (e.g., what happens if template ID is invalid), or authentication requirements beyond the apiKey parameter.

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, concise sentence that immediately communicates the core purpose. No extraneous information, and the key details (by ID, includes EmailContent JSON) are front-loaded.

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 simple get operation with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose but omits important context like possible return fields (only mentions EmailContent), error conditions (e.g., not found), and any limitations. More completeness would be beneficial.

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 both parameters already described. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 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 clearly states the action 'Get', the resource 'single starter template', and the unique identifier 'by ID'. It also specifies that the result includes 'EmailContent JSON', distinguishing it from siblings like list_templates (which returns all templates) and design_email_template (which modifies 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 implies usage when a specific template's details are needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., list_templates for browsing, design_email_template for editing). No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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