List themes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation by using 'List', but it does not explicitly state that it causes no changes or mention any side effects, permissions, or return details. For a simple list tool, this is acceptable but leaves room for the agent to assume the operation is safe without explicit confirmation.

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, front-loaded sentence consisting of eight words. It communicates the entire purpose without any filler or redundancy, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it names the resource (installed themes) and the specific output attribute (active theme). This gives the agent enough information to invoke the tool and interpret the expected result. No further context is needed for this low-complexity operation.

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 only parameter 'site' fully described as 'Configured site name. Omit to use the default site.' The tool description adds no additional parameter explanation, but since the schema already provides complete semantics, the baseline of 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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('installed themes') and adds the detail 'and which one is active', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like wp_list_plugins or wp_list_post_types by identifying the exact resource it targets.

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 context is clear: use this tool to enumerate installed themes and check the active one. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, the simple list operation and distinct resource make the intended usage evident. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated, but none are needed for such a basic read operation.

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