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

Annotations declare a non-read-only, non-destructive create operation, and the description adds valuable non-obvious behavior: the preset is a template whose deletion or editing does not affect surveys it was applied to. It does not cover permission needs or return behavior, but that is less critical with annotations present.

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, both front-loaded with the key purpose and the template-independence rule. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 create tool with a nested settings object and no output schema, the description covers purpose and a key behavioral caveat. It could mention workspace scoping more explicitly, but the schema already handles parameter details.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 gives a specific verb ('Сохраняет' — saves) and a specific resource ('набор оформления' — appearance preset) plus its destination ('в библиотеку аккаунта'). It also defines the resource as a reusable template, which distinguishes it from direct palette updates.

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 clearly implies the use case: create a reusable appearance preset to apply to other surveys. It does not state exclusions or name alternative tools such as update_workspace_report_palette, so it falls short of full when-to-use guidance.

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