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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only' merely restates structured data. It adds no behavioral context such as pagination behavior, result limits, or what a preset contains, despite the tool exposing limit/cursor/offset parameters.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no padding. The only waste is the trailing 'Read-only', which duplicates the readOnlyHint annotation rather than adding 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?

For a paginated listing tool with six parameters, low schema coverage and no output schema, the description should explain pagination and what fields a preset returns. Neither is addressed, leaving the agent under-informed about correct invocation.

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?

Six parameters exist at only 33% schema description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. limit, cursor, offset, query and brand_id are left entirely to the sparse schema, so the description contributes zero parameter meaning.

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 (List) and resource (destination presets), scoped to the workspace and framed by its use case (multi-channel fan-out). The verb naturally distinguishes it from the siblings aidelly_create_destination_preset and aidelly_preview_destination_preset, though it does not name them explicitly.

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 gives no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives such as aidelly_preview_destination_preset, nor any prerequisites or pagination workflow. Usage is only inferable from the name and 'multi-channel fan-out' context.

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