list_themes

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

As a read operation, the description implies no side effects. However, pagination behavior (via limit parameter) is not explicitly described, though the parameter schema provides details. No annotations are present to contradict.

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second adds filter guidance and scope. No extraneous words, front-loaded with essential 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, filter usage, and access scope. It could mention the return format (array of theme objects), but the tool is simple and the omission is minor.

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 coverage is 100% so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining role filtering with examples ('MAIN for published theme, development themes'), enhancing comprehension beyond the schema.

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 'List all themes installed on the online store' and specifies filtering by role, distinguishing it from single-theme get_theme and other theme-related tools.

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 notes the required 'read_themes access scope' and gives examples of role filtering, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like get_theme for a single theme.

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