tuik_list_themes

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses a read-only behavior via 'list' and that the lang parameter affects the language of names, but it does not mention ordering, error conditions, or pagination. For a simple listing, this is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with two sentences dedicated to purpose and parameter semantics. It avoids unnecessary detail while effectively conveying the necessary information.

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 simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It lacks usage guidance and explicit behavioral details, but these are less critical for a straightforward listing operation. The description covers the essential purpose and the only parameter.

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 schema provides no description coverage, but the description explains the lang parameter values ('tr' for Turkish, 'en' for English). This adds meaning beyond the schema, which only shows a default of 'tr'. The single parameter is well documented in the description.

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 TUIK statistical themes (top-level categories) with their ids. The verb 'list' and resource 'themes' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like tuik_list_tables and evds_categories. The clarification 'top-level categories' adds useful scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tuik_list_tables or evds_categories. It does not mention prerequisites, follow-on calls, or any context that would help an agent decide between them. The only usage hint is the lang parameter, which is parameter semantics.

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