get_theme_guide

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get details' clearly signals a read-only operation, and the scope of the output is defined by the listed themes and defineTheme syntax. It does not describe behavior when themeName is omitted, but this is a minor gap for a getter with one optional parameter.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It immediately states the purpose, lists the relevant theme names, and includes the defineTheme alternative without redundancy.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter values well. The only notable omission is what happens when themeName is absent, but the schema already marks it optional, and the overall context is sufficient for a simple retrieval tool.

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%, setting a baseline of 3. The description goes slightly beyond the schema by clarifying that the listed values are theme names and that defineTheme refers to CSS custom property syntax, which adds useful semantic context for selecting a value.

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 states a specific verb ('Get details'), a specific resource ('Astryx themes'), and enumerates the exact theme names plus the custom defineTheme syntax. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and clearly distinct from siblings that handle components or CLI commands.

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 when to use the tool: when you need Astryx theme details or defineTheme syntax. However, it provides no explicit guidance on alternatives, such as search_astryx_docs, or exclusions that would help an agent choose between siblings.

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