list_themes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and locality are covered structurally. The description adds the meaningful qualifier 'installed', indicating only locally present themes are returned rather than remote ones. It does not say whether output is a flat name list, ordering, or whether themes are grouped, which would be useful extra context.

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 short sentence with the resource and scope front-loaded and no wasted words. It is arguably too terse rather than padded.

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 no-argument read-only list tool this is close to adequate, and annotations carry the safety profile. However, no output schema exists, so the description is the only place to indicate what the returned list looks like, and it does not.

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?

Zero parameters, so the schema baseline applies; there is nothing for the description to clarify. The description correctly implies the tool takes no arguments.

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 (List) and scoped resource (all installed HyDE themes), so an agent knows it enumerates not fetches a single theme. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from get_current_theme or list_theme_wallpapers, leaving the sibling routing to be inferred from names alone.

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: an agent would call this to discover valid theme names before set_theme. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer get_current_theme, list_theme_wallpapers, or next_theme/prev_theme instead, and no preconditions given.

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