get_app_theme

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only indicates a read operation via 'Get' but does not mention permissions, rate limits, or whether the response is public. It also fails to describe the structure or content of 'theme settings'.

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 short but has redundancy: the first line 'Get App Theme' repeats the tool name. The endpoint line provides technical detail, while the third line is the core purpose. It could be condensed into a single sentence without loss.

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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description should explain what 'theme settings' includes (e.g., colors, layout). Without this, the agent does not know the return value's semantics or structure, making the description incomplete.

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 has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description adds the endpoint URL, which is not present in the schema. Per guidelines, with 0 parameters the baseline is 4, and the description provides slight extra context.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: retrieving the current theme settings. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and a resource ('theme settings'), avoiding tautology. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools such as 'get_recipe' or 'get_logged_in_user', though their purposes are distinct by name.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternative tools like 'get_startup_info' or 'app_about_get_app_info'. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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