List themes

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation, and the description adds value by disclosing the output content (GIDs and roles) and the special meaning of role MAIN. It does not mention pagination or limits, but for a simple list tool with no parameters this is adequate.

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 consists of two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence earns its place: the first defines the tool, the second explains the significance of role MAIN and cross-references sibling tools.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description clearly states what the tool returns (GIDs, roles) and provides the domain knowledge that MAIN is the live theme. It also links to downstream usage, making the tool's purpose and integration context fully understandable.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details. It focuses on the output, which 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 uses a specific verb 'list' with a clear resource ('the store's themes') and specifies what is included (GIDs, roles). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like page_list and menu_list by scoping to themes, and even names the dependent tools theme_read_file and theme_update_file.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: to obtain theme IDs for use with theme_read_file and theme_update_file. It also provides practical context about the role MAIN being the published live theme, which helps the agent understand which theme to select.

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