Show current Omarchy theme

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clarifies that it returns the theme name, not a detailed object, but does not disclose side effects (expectedly none), error cases, or response format. The added detail 'name of the currently applied' is useful but minimal for a read-only getter.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the exact action and scope 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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states what is returned (the theme name) and the selectable scope (currently applied). Lacks explicit mention of return type, but it's implied. The simplicity of the tool does not demand more.

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?

There are 0 parameters, so schema description coverage is trivially 100%. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description correctly adds no parameter-related information since none exist. No deduction needed.

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 clear verb ('Show') and resource ('name of the currently applied Omarchy theme'), which distinguishes it from theme_list (list all) and theme_set (set theme). The specificity of 'currently applied' makes the purpose 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?

The purpose is implied by the name and description, but no explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like theme_list or theme_set. The description does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or comparison to siblings.

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