Apply an Omarchy theme (verified)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it applies a theme and verifies it, indicating a state change, but does not mention side effects, permissions, reversibility, or failure behavior. For a mutating tool, this is a moderate gap.

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 that states the action and verification step with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool.

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 apply tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action and verification. It lacks details on error handling or prerequisites (e.g., must have theme_list populated), but these are minor for such a straightforward 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 coverage is 100%; the parameter description already explains that 'name' is a display name or slug from theme_list. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning, mainly reinforcing the source. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the semantics.

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 'Apply' and the resource 'theme from theme_list', and includes a verification step. This distinguishes it from siblings like theme_list (which lists themes) and theme_current (which shows the current theme), so an agent can tell this is the mutating, apply-specific tool.

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 theme must come from theme_list and mentions verifying afterwards, giving a clear workflow. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for background themes) or name alternatives, though 'from theme_list' provides implicit routing.

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