Remove Map Theme

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

Annotations already provide 'destructiveHint: true', which the description aligns with. The description adds no extra behavioral details beyond what annotations convey, such as permanence or side effects.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence and no wasted words. It could benefit from structured information but remains efficient for its simple purpose.

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 destructive action with no output schema, the description should explain consequences (e.g., irreversibility, effect on themes currently applied) and provide minimal context. It falls short, leaving the agent without critical usage information.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must add meaning for the single parameter 'name'. It only repeats 'by name' without clarifying what constitutes a valid name (e.g., display name or identifier) or how to obtain it.

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 (remove), the resource (map theme), and the method (by name). It distinguishes well from sibling tools like 'add_map_theme' or 'get_map_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 use when wanting to delete a theme, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., theme must exist), or when not to use.

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