Get LimeSurvey theme publication instructions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds detail about the content of the returned steps (installation, preview, etc.), which provides some behavioral context beyond annotations but does not reveal additional traits like authentication requirements or 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 a single sentence of 20 words that immediately conveys the tool's output. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, and every word adds value, making it highly concise with no unnecessary repetition.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated true), the description does not need to detail return values. However, the tool has 5 parameters, including required ones like hosting and publication_scope, and the description does not explain how these inputs shape the output. The mention of 'version-aware' partly addresses the installed_limesurvey_version parameter, but overall it lacks completeness for a parameter-rich tool.

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 60% (3 of 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema). The tool description does not explain any parameter's purpose or how they affect the output. Parameters like hosting and publication_scope lack schema descriptions, and the tool description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to interpret the input schema alone.

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 clearly states it returns version-aware installation, preview, assignment, accessibility, rollback, and optional community-publication steps for a survey theme. The verb 'return' and specific resource distinguish it from sibling tools such as limesurvey_generate_survey_theme or limesurvey_assign_survey_theme.

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 description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like limesurvey_generate_survey_theme or limesurvey_validate_survey_theme. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it is provided, leaving the agent to infer appropriate contexts.

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