List themes

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower; the description nonetheless adds real behavior: it calls the WS command frontend/get_themes and returns Home Assistant's response unchanged, signaling a raw passthrough with no server-side transformation. It does not discuss caching or failure behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Three short blocks — what it does, when to use it, what it returns — front-loaded with the core action and free of filler. Every sentence contributes information an agent can act on.

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?

With annotations covering safety, an output schema present, and the description naming the underlying WS call and the shape of the result (themes map, default_theme, default_dark_theme), an agent has everything needed to select and invoke this correctly.

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 zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond confirming the call is unfiltered and returns the entire theme registry.

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 and resource ("List all Lovelace themes registered with the frontend") and pins down the scope as themes registered with the frontend, which separates it from storage/file-oriented siblings like themes_list_theme_files. An agent can tell what it enumerates without opening the schema.

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?

The "Use when" clause gives a concrete trigger: needing every theme's name and the active one before switching or editing, which ties it naturally to themes_set_active_theme and themes_update_theme. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool or an exclusion, so it falls short of a 5.

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