wave_set_theme

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior itself. It usefully reveals that this writes to settings.json and uses a two-step confirmation flow, but it does not state permission requirements, reversibility, what the confirmation contains, or other side effects.

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 two compact sentences with no wasted wording. The key behavior, settings write and approval flow, is 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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential confirmation mechanism and settings file target. It remains incomplete on permissions, reversibility, failure behavior, and relationship to similar settings/appearance tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both the theme and approved parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the approved parameter's role in the confirmation workflow but does not add substantial parameter semantics 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: setting the Wave Terminal theme, and adds implementation detail that it writes 'term:theme' to settings.json. It does not differentiate from sibling settings/appearance tools such as wave_set_setting or wave_set_appearance, so it is clear but lacks sibling routing guidance.

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?

It gives procedural usage for the confirmation flow: first call returns a confirmation, then pass approved=true to execute. However, it does not say when to use this instead of wave_set_setting or wave_set_appearance, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions.

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