get_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it retrieves a template by ID and mentions a platform restriction ('Qiita Team only'), but doesn't describe authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what the response contains. For a retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no wasted verbiage or redundant information. The parenthetical about 'Qiita Team only' adds necessary context without bloating the 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a simple single-parameter input schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'template' is in this context, what data is returned, authentication requirements, or error handling. For a tool that presumably returns structured data, more context is needed despite the simple schema.

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 already documents the single 'template_id' parameter. The description doesn't add any meaningful parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., format examples, validation rules, or where to find template IDs). Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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') and resource ('a specific template by ID'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_templates' or 'get_item', which could cause confusion about when to use this versus other retrieval tools.

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 mentions 'Qiita Team only', which provides some context about platform restrictions, but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_templates' or 'get_item'. There's no explicit when/when-not usage advice or comparison to sibling tools.

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