Theme Base Change

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing. For a mutation that swaps a site's base theme, the agent is not told about permission requirements, reversibility, side effects on child themes, or cache/rendering impact.

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 single sentence is short but not concise in the meaningful sense: it is under-specified rather than economical. Brevity here reflects missing content, not disciplined editing.

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?

A mutation tool with no annotations, zero parameter documentation, and no usage context leaves the agent unable to invoke it correctly. The existing output schema does not cover the input/behavioral gaps, and nothing in the description fills them.

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 3 parameters at 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but instead adds nothing. It does not explain what machine_name identifies, what new_base_theme must reference, or what the optional path parameter does.

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?

States a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('base theme'), so the agent knows the operation's target. However, it offers no differentiation from sibling theme tools such as theme_create, theme_settings_form, or theme_library_create.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. that the machine_name must reference an existing theme), and no note about when it should not be used. Usage must be entirely inferred.

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