Update theme file

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already discloses the destructive nature of the operation. The description's 'Overwrite' confirms this but adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., permissions, reversibility, failure modes). The theme_list prerequisite is a usage note, not a behavioral disclosure. With annotations covering safety profile, this is an appropriate score.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by a necessary prerequisite. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundant 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 file overwrite tool, the description combined with annotations (destructiveHint) and full schema coverage provides sufficient context. The workflow dependency on theme_list is explicitly stated, and no output schema is needed for a write operation. The tool is adequately specified for an agent to use correctly.

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% for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter semantics; the only hint is to get themeId from theme_list, which is already implied by the GID format in the schema. No extra meaning is added for filePath or fileContent.

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 it overwrites one file in a Shopify theme, specifying the verb 'Overwrite' and the resource 'theme file'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like theme_read_file (read operation) and page_update (different resource type). The title and description are consistent and specific.

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 provides a prerequisite: 'Get the theme ID from theme_list first.' This tells the agent when to use this tool relative to theme_list, establishing a clear workflow. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the sibling context and the specific action make the usage context clear.

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