Create a project template

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

Annotations already declare the write/destructive/open-world/non-idempotent profile. The description adds genuinely new context: it preserves the native source JSON and returns provider template metadata rather than a render result, which helps since there is no output schema. It stops short of explaining the confirm requirement or side effects of creation.

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 short sentences are compact, but the first ('Confirmed current v2 template creation') is telegraphic overlap with the title, and the second crams three distinct facts into one clause. Compact but not cleanly front-loaded, and some phrasing earns no place.

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 destructive, open-world, non-idempotent mutation with a nested object param and no output schema, the description is only partially adequate: it notes the returned provider metadata and that the source object is not fully locally validated, but omits confirm semantics and the v2 vs legacy template distinction.

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 carries parameter meaning; baseline is 3. 'Preserves native source JSON' loosely maps to the source param but adds no syntax or validation detail beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('template creation') and explicitly distinguishes itself from render siblings with 'not a render.' However, the fragment 'Confirmed current v2 template creation' injects ambiguous jargon ('Confirmed', 'v2') that muddies rather than sharpens the purpose.

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 only routing cue is 'not a render,' which implicitly steers away from create_render/submit_render_batch. There is no guidance on when to use create_template vs update_template, nor any mention of prerequisites like the required confirm flag.

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