legal_put_theme

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses one valuable constraint ('Only --cvrt-consent-* properties are accepted'), which tells the agent a validation rule. However, for a mutation ('put') it omits whether unmentioned vars are preserved or wiped (merge vs replace semantics) and any permission requirements.

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 tight sentences with zero waste. The action and the CSS-property restriction are both front-loaded, making the definition fast to parse.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the accepted namespace but is silent on replacement semantics (does omitting a var reset it?) and side effects. This is adequate but leaves a meaningful behavioral gap for a write 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (site, vars, preset). The description reinforces the accepted property namespace for vars and the preset/vars duality, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Set) and resource (banner theme preset and/or CSS custom properties), which is clearly distinct from the sibling read tool legal_get_theme. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling to contrast with, but the write-oriented purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance. The only sibling that overlaps (legal_get_theme) is never referenced, and no prerequisite like fetching current theme first is mentioned.

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