list_portal_themes

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds a little context by defining themes as 'color palettes, CSS variables,' but does not disclose other behavioral traits like pagination, sort order, or response structure. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description adds minimal but acceptable value.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. The parenthetical about color palettes and CSS variables adds valuable context in a compact way, with no wasted words.

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 straightforward read-only list operation with one optional parameter and strong annotations, the description is adequately complete. It identifies the resource and its nature, and the schema covers the limit parameter. It does not explain return values, but the simplicity of the tool does not demand more.

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 single parameter 'limit' is already well-described in the input schema, including its default value (25). The description does not add any further meaning about the parameter or its usage. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the tool lists Service Portal themes with a parenthetical defining what themes are (color palettes, CSS variables). The verb 'List' and resource are specific. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_portal_theme, but the list vs. get distinction is implicit in the name and description.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_portal_theme or list_portal_pages. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about which scenarios favor this tool. The usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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