linear_getIssueTemplateById

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get details', implying a safe read operation, but does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior, permissions requirements, or limits (e.g., rate limits, return structure). This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation safety net.

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 short phrase) and front-loaded with the core action. While it lacks structure or expanded context, it wastes no words and avoids redundancy.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description should explain what 'details' are returned (e.g., template fields, status). The current description is too vague for an agent to understand the tool's full capability, especially compared to richer sibling descriptions.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with description for the single parameter 'id'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not provide extra context (e.g., format, example).

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'issue template', which succinctly conveys that the tool retrieves details of a specific issue template. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like linear_getIssueTemplates (which lists templates) and linear_createIssueTemplate (which creates).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., linear_getIssueTemplates for listing all templates). There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making cues.

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