pdf_template_config_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It makes clear this is a non-destructive preview operation that generates HTML output with sample data. However, it doesn't disclose what 'sample invoice data' contains, whether the preview reflects currently-saved config or only the overrides passed in parameters, or what happens with missing company context.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and zero wasted words. The first sentence states what it does and the second states when to use it. This is exemplary conciseness for a description.

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?

The tool is relatively simple (4 optional params, no nested objects, no output schema), and the description covers the core purpose and primary use case. Given no output schema, it doesn't describe the return format, which would be helpful for an HTML-returning tool. For a preview tool of this simplicity, the description is reasonably complete but could mention the response format.

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 documents all four parameters well. The description adds the key context that these parameters are preview overrides ('companyId overrides configured default' is in schema, but description frames all params as representing the prospective config). It doesn't repeat schema details redundantly, which respects the high coverage baseline.

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+resource combination ('Generate an HTML preview of a PDF template') and clearly states the scope ('with sample invoice data'). It distinguishes from siblings like pdf_template_config_update and pdf_template_config_get by clarifying this is a preview action, not a read or write of config.

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 states when to use it ('preview how a template will look before saving configuration changes'), which gives clear usage context. It implies it should be used before pdf_template_config_update but doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when NOT to use it. Still, the 'before saving configuration changes' framing provides strong contextual guidance.

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