update_current_theme

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

The description only says 'Switch' without detailing side effects, such as whether existing customizations are preserved or lost, or if the change is immediate. Annotations provide destructiveHint: false, which is consistent, but no additional behavioral context is given.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It communicates the essential function efficiently.

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 update tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally acceptable. It could be more complete by explaining the effect of the switch or confirming that theme_key must come from search_themes, but that information is already in the 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?

Both parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so the 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 clearly states the action ('Switch') and resource ('wedding website to a different theme template'). It uniquely identifies this as the tool for changing the theme, distinguishing it from read tools like get_current_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 description implies the usage context (changing theme) but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or when not to use it. The schema references search_themes for theme_key, providing implicit guidance, but the description itself lacks explicit directions.

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