suggest_themes

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

The description details the process: extracts dominant colors, returns a JSON list with specific fields, orders by recommendation, and chooses text color and frame for contrast. No annotations exist, so the burden is fully on the description, which sufficiently covers the tool's behavior.

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 concise (6 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence serves a clear role: purpose, usage, outputs, presentation, and argument definition. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool has a simple input and an output schema (not shown but referenced), the description covers the essential aspects: input format, output structure, and user guidance. It could mention error handling or missing screenshots, but overall it's adequate.

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 single parameter 'screenshots' is described as 'Absolute paths of the app screenshots to analyze,' which adds meaningful context beyond the schema's bare type definition. Schema coverage is 0%, so this description is essential and effective.

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 tool derives background theme suggestions from the app's own colors and distinguishes from sibling tools (create_iphone_mockup, create_iphone_mockups_batch) by emphasizing it should be called first before rendering mockups.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call this tool first before any mockups, provides a clear workflow: extract colors, return themes, present list, recommend first entry, offer custom option. This is comprehensive guidance.

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