get_template

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only that the template is 'stored' (as opposed to a draft), which is a small but real distinction; it says nothing about lookup failure behavior or whether a missing ID errors.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every clause carries information: the cardinality (one), the resource, and the identifier type.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema required, the description is essentially sufficient. A note on where to obtain the ID or on lookup-miss behavior would complete it.

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 coverage is 0% – the sole 'id' parameter has no description or format note in the schema. The description partially compensates by identifying it as the InstantReply template ID (not a phone number or channel ID), which is meaningful, but gives no format or sourcing guidance (e.g. from list_templates).

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?

Specific verb (Get) and resource (stored WhatsApp template) with a scope qualifier (one, by InstantReply template ID) that separates it from the sibling list_templates. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'by InstantReply template ID' suggests you need a known ID already in hand, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over list_templates or validate_template, and no prerequisites noted.

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