Find similar themes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is read-only and free, that it lists Pro kits without exposing their contents, and that the similarity score is a starting point rather than a verdict. This goes beyond the bare minimum.

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?

Five sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage, prerequisite, interpretation, and behavioral disclosure. No fluff, front-loaded with purpose.

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-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns, how to use it, what to watch out for, and when to choose it. This is fully complete for an agent to invoke. The sibling set includes list_themes/search_themes and recommend_kits, and the description clearly situates similar_themes among them.

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 input schema already covers both parameters with 100% coverage. The description reinforces the need for an existing slug but does not add new parameter details beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Find published kits close to one you already have, ranked by palette proximity, shared tags, and audience.' This clearly distinguishes it from searching or listing tools by focusing on similarity to an existing kit, and mentions ranking criteria.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('when the user likes a direction but wants options, or when a candidate is nearly right and you want neighbours to compare') and provides a prerequisite with alternative tools ('start from list_themes or search_themes if you do not have one yet'). Also advises to judge fit yourself, setting expectations.

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