Get a theme preview URL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to repeat safety. It adds valuable behavioral specifics: the token expires, the URL is private, and it doesn't affect other viewers. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two sentences carry full purpose, behavior, and usage guidance with zero filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and every clause adds distinct information (tokenised, private, expiry, no-op for others).

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 simple read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what it returns (a URL), how it behaves (private, temporary), and when to use it (preview checks). No missing information that an agent needs to call it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptive parameter docs for path, theme, and site_id. The description adds general context (token expiry) but doesn't augment parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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 action (get a tokenised private URL) and the resource (preview URL for a draft theme), and explains its unique purpose: render the site without affecting others. It distinguishes itself from theme management siblings by focusing on preview, not activation or publishing.

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 gives clear context: use it to check work before publishing, implying it's the pre-publication preview tool. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the 'before publishing' guidance effectively communicates when it's appropriate.

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