get_theme

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that it raises ValueError if theme_id doesn't exist, and that it works for any theme regardless of size. It doesn't mention side effects or read-only nature, but the name 'get' implies read-only. The error behavior is a key transparency element.

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 concise, starts with the action and key data, then explains the argument and error. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the input semantics, the error case, and the scope. It also connects to list_themes. Nothing critical is missing.

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 provides no description for theme_id (0% coverage). The description fully compensates by specifying the source (list_themes), an example format, and the domain (any theme produced by clustering). This adds meaning beyond the schema.

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 (theme) and lists the exact data returned (member items, representative quotes, source breakdown). This clearly differentiates from the sibling list_themes by focusing on a single theme's details.

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?

Mentions that theme_id comes from list_themes, implying the intended workflow of listing first then getting details. Also notes it works for themes smaller than list_themes' default min_items, which is a usage nuance. However, it doesn't explicitly say when to use this vs alternatives, but the reference to list_themes is a strong cue.

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