get_theme

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations, such as accepting a partial name (case-insensitive) and returning details. No contradictions with annotations.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core functionality and constraints.

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's simplicity, no output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description provides sufficient context. It covers what the tool does, how to use parameters, and when to avoid it. A slight gap is the lack of detail on what 'details' are returned, but this is acceptable for a well-understood domain.

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 input schema fully describes both parameters (id and name), but the description adds meaning by explaining that 'name' supports partial match and case-insensitive lookup, and that 'id' is the theme ID. This clarifies the exact usage beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'view details of a specific custom color theme'. It identifies the resource (custom color theme) and action (view details). Additionally, it distinguishes from the sibling tool 'list_themes' by specifying when not to use this tool.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use the tool ('when the user wants to view details of a specific custom color theme') and when not to use it ('Do NOT use this for listing all themes (use list_themes)'). This helps the agent select the correct tool.

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