List themes

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds behavioral value by disclosing exactly what the response will convey: active theme, block-theme designation, versions, and parents, which goes beyond the bare annotation and 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the primary action and then enumerates the useful output attributes. There is no redundant wording or repetition of the tool title or schema fields.

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 listing tool with only two optional parameters, the description and schema together fully equip an agent to call it correctly. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit list of fields the tool returns.

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 100%, covering both the status filter and site_id selection, so the description need not repeat them. The tool description adds no direct parameter detail, but it does reinforce the list scope. This aligns with the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'every theme installed on the site', and the key output dimensions: active status, block/full-site-editing status, versions, and parents. This is specific enough to distinguish it from related siblings such as list_draft_themes, get_theme, and search_themes.

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 use case is clear: call this when you need an inventory of installed themes with status and version information. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the wording 'every theme installed on the site' implies the boundary and no misleading alternatives are presented.

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