get_template

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does well on content composition – listing the four artifacts returned and noting guide/examples are optional bundles – but says nothing about read-only safety, behavior on an unknown template_id, or how the parts are packaged in the response.

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 no filler; the resource comes first and the content list follows. The enumeration is dense but every item corresponds to something actually returned.

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?

A read-only, three-parameter retrieval tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, so the description should mainly tell the agent what comes back. It names the content types but not their structure or format (e.g., whether sections are concatenated, keyed, or include metadata), leaving a real gap for a tool whose entire value is the return payload.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's enumeration of guide/process instructions/examples loosely maps to include_guide and include_example, adding slight clarity about what those toggles yield, but the schema already documents defaults and the TGDP guide semantics, so marginal value only.

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 (get) and resource (template by ID) plus the payload returned: raw Markdown, authoring guide, process instructions, examples. An agent can distinguish it from list_templates/search_templates by the single-ID retrieval, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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 required template_id makes it obvious this is a fetch-after-discovery call, but nothing states when to prefer it over get_style_guide or when to use list_templates/search_templates first to find an ID. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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