obsidian_themes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is known. However, the description adds no behavioral details beyond 'list', such as whether it returns all themes or only community themes, or what the output format is.

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 very concise with three words, but lacks structure or any additional context. It is not overly verbose, but also does not fully capitalize on the opportunity to provide useful information.

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 no output schema, the description should at least hint at the output format (e.g., names of themes). It does not, leaving agents to guess the return value. Given the tool's low complexity, this is a noticeable gap.

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 one boolean parameter fully described. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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 'List installed themes' clearly identifies the verb (list) and resource (installed themes). It distinguishes from siblings like 'obsidian_theme' (likely singular) by using plural, but does not explicitly differentiate from other listing tools like 'obsidian_plugins'.

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 like 'obsidian_theme' or 'obsidian_css'. The description provides no context for when this listing is appropriate or limitations.

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