next_theme

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false with destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows state changes, but the description adds nothing about what actually changes (wallpaper, colors, waybar?), whether cycling wraps at the last theme, or whether the change is immediate. For a zero-param mutation with no output schema, the return value is also unexplained.

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 zero waste. Brevity here is appropriate for a zero-argument tool; the shortfall is in substance, not structure.

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?

Simple signature and no output schema keep the bar low, but the description still omits wrap-around behavior and the scope of the theme change, which an agent needs to avoid surprising side effects. Adequate but with a visible gap.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so the schema baseline is 4. There is nothing parameter-related the description could clarify.

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 ('Cycle') and resource ('HyDE theme') with directional qualifier 'next', which implicitly separates it from prev_theme and set_theme. It is clear what the tool does, though it never names the sibling it contrasts with.

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 on when to use this versus set_theme (explicit selection), list_themes (discovery), or prev_theme (reverse direction). The agent must infer that this is a relative stepping operation from the word 'next' alone.

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