themes_get

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

The description implies a read operation ('Get details') with no destructive behavior, but no annotations are provided to confirm safety. It does not disclose authentication needs, response format, or error behavior, which is acceptable for a simple getter but not fully transparent.

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 sentence of 7 words, front-loaded with the action 'Get details'. It is extremely concise with no wasted text.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on what 'details' include (e.g., name, colors) or behavior for invalid IDs. It could be more helpful given the lack of output schema.

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 the parameter 'id' described as 'The ID of the theme'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so 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 'Get details of a specific theme' clearly states the verb (Get) and resource (details of a specific theme), distinguishing it from siblings like themes_get_all (get all themes) and themes_get_slide (get slide details).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as themes_get_all or themes_get_slide. There are no prerequisites or context provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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