Apply Map Theme

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

The annotation idempotentHint is present, indicating repeated applications have no additional effect. The description adds context by revealing that the tool modifies layer visibility to match the saved theme state, which is important because it changes the project's visual state. However, it doesn't mention error handling or prerequisites like the theme existing.

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 which fully states the purpose and effect in under 15 words. No wasted content.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so complete guidance should clarify that 'name' refers to an existing theme. The description doesn't mention that the theme must have been created earlier or what happens if it doesn't exist. Given the simplicity, the description is close but lacks these important contextual details.

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 schema has one required parameter 'name' with no description (0% coverage). The description mentions 'the theme' but doesn't explicitly state that the 'name' parameter is the map theme's name, nor does it clarify format or requirement that the theme must already exist. This leaves ambiguity despite the apparent simplicity.

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 a map theme' and explains the effect: 'restores the layer visibility state saved in the theme.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_map_theme and remove_map_theme, which manage themes.

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 use case—restoring a saved layer visibility state—but doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over direct layer visibility tools like set_layer_visibility. It offers no exclusions or alternative tool references, so guidance is minimal.

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