trawl_prompts_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and it does not disclose error behavior for an unknown prompt_id, how missing variables are handled, or whether substitution is strict or lenient. It only conveys that a substitution step exists.

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?

One front-loaded sentence covering resource, identifier, and the optional substitution capability, with no filler. It is efficient though quite terse for a tool with no annotations to fall back on.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should say what comes back (rendered text vs. raw template plus metadata) and how substitution failures surface. It leaves both unanswered, so an agent knows what to send but not what to expect.

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 parameters are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description adds only the notion that 'variables' is optional substitution rather than anything about matching keys to placeholders.

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: fetch a single prompt template by ID, with optional variable substitution. This is distinguishable from the search-style siblings (trawl_prompts_find, trawl_prompts_search_live), but the description never explicitly names them to sharpen the contrast.

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 'by ID' phrasing implies it should be used when a prompt_id is already known and that lookup/search belongs to a sibling, but no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternative is named. An agent must infer the routing.

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