List themes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying exactly what information is returned (active status, block theme flag, versions, parents), which goes beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

A single, tightly crafted sentence that leads with the core action ('List every theme') and then packs in the key output fields without wasted words. All essential information is front-loaded.

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 read-only listing tool with two optional parameters whose schema is fully documented, the description is complete. It tells the agent what to expect in the result (active, block, versions, parents) and covers the operational scope, so nothing critical for invoking it correctly is missing.

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%, and both parameters (status, site_id) are fully described in the schema. The tool description adds no further parameter guidance, so it does not enhance what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a concrete resource ('every theme installed on the site'), and the key distinguishing fields (active status, block/FSE themes, versions, parents). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_theme (single theme) and activate_theme, without needing to inspect schemas.

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 clearly implies the tool is for enumerating all themes, giving the context of a list operation. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., 'use get_theme for a single theme') or exclusion criteria, so it falls short of a 5.

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