search_themes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full behavioral burden. It discloses the match type (substring) and the searched fields, which is useful, but says nothing about case sensitivity, result ordering, pagination/default limit behavior, or the return shape.

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 efficient sentence with the search scope front-loaded and zero filler. Arguably too terse for a tool with 0% schema coverage, but structurally sound.

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 two-parameter read-only search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core search semantics. It is still missing limit/pagination behavior and return-format hints, leaving a modest gap for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It clarifies what the required 'query' matches against (theme names, descriptions, token values), which is genuinely useful. However, the 'limit' parameter (1-50, default unknown) is entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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 ('Substring search') and specifies the searchable fields (theme names, descriptions, token values). Clear on what it does, but does not differentiate itself from the sibling list_themes or get_theme, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and does not mention alternatives such as list_themes or get_theme. The agent must guess whether to search or enumerate.

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