qui_list_custom_themes

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already communicates the operation is read-only. The description adds nothing about rate limits, authentication, pagination, or any side effects. It only explains how to pass parameters, which is not behavioral disclosure.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence identifies the action, the second explains argument structure. Perfectly sized.

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?

The description provides enough to invoke the endpoint and structure arguments. With an output schema present, return values are likely documented. Missing is clarity on when to use this tool, which is a gap, but for a simple read-only list, it's minimally complete.

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?

The input schema offers only a free-form 'arguments' object with no property descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining that path variables go directly in arguments, query values in arguments.params, and the body in arguments.body. This is essential guidance, though it doesn't enumerate endpoint-specific parameters.

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 tells the agent to call qui's GET /themes/custom endpoint, which clearly indicates a read operation for custom themes. The tool name 'qui_list_custom_themes' further confirms the purpose. However, the description focuses on the endpoint call rather than explicitly stating 'lists custom themes', so it's clear but slightly indirect.

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 information is provided about when to use this tool versus other list tools. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites. The only guidance is about argument structure, which falls under parameter semantics.

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