Mes thèmes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does add real value: it discloses that suggested themes are derived from the user's video hashtags, and that the call is 'Hors quota' (not counted against quota). What it does not state is the return shape — whether the three categories come back as separate lists, plain strings, or with counts — which matters since there is no output schema.

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 sentences: the content is front-loaded, the filter role and the quota exemption each get a single clause, and there is no filler or repetition of the title.

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 zero-parameter read tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers provenance, purpose (filter values for searches), and the quota behavior. The one remaining gap is how the three theme categories are returned, which an agent would need to know to consume the result 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, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. No parameter text is required or missing.

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 names the concrete resource: the user's selected themes on viraldar, the themes suggested from their videos' hashtags, and those hashtags. That is far more specific than the title 'Mes thèmes' and an agent can tell it is a read of theme data. It stops short of naming the obvious sibling modifier_mes_themes as the mutation counterpart, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

'Sert de filtre `mes_themes` aux recherches' implies the usage: fetch this to obtain valid values for the mes_themes search filter. There is no explicit when-not guidance and no mention that modifier_mes_themes is the tool for changing the selection, so the agent must infer the boundary itself.

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