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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond a generic phrase; it doesn't mention that the preview is non-persistent, what formats are supported, or any output details.

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 a single short sentence, which is brief, but it is under-specified rather than effectively concise. It does not convey the necessary information to use the tool, so the brevity is not a positive trait.

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 three parameters including an enum and nested object, and no output schema, the description is far too incomplete. It does not explain what the preview returns, how to use the accept parameter, or what data should look like, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 0%, and the description provides no meaning for the three parameters (template_id, data, accept). The description does not explain that template_id identifies which template, data is the fill data, or that accept controls output format. This is a complete failure to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'See how your document will look' gives a general sense of previewing, but it doesn't explicitly mention template, data, or rendering. It's not a tautology but is vague and does not distinguish the tool from siblings like fill_template or download_pdf.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use preview_template versus alternatives. The description does not mention that it's for previewing before filling or downloading, nor does it reference any sibling tools for exclusion.

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