plugin_set_preset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'load preset by numeric index.' It does not mention that loading changes the current plugin state, what happens with invalid or out-of-range presets, or how slot/location affect behavior.

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 and front-loaded, with no wasted words. It is arguably too sparse, but as a one-sentence definition it is efficiently structured.

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 mutating tool with no annotations, no output schema, four parameters, and many plugin-related siblings, a single sentence is inadequate. The agent is left without parameter semantics, usage prerequisites, range behavior, or success/failure signals.

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 0% with four parameters, and the description adds almost no parameter meaning. 'Numeric index' vaguely maps to the preset parameter, but the required 'index' property and optional slot/location properties remain completely unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb ('load') and resource ('preset') and indicates a direct numeric index mechanism, which roughly distinguishes it from sibling preset-stepping tools like plugin_next_preset and plugin_prev_preset. However, it does not explicitly disambiguate from siblings or clarify whether the numeric index is the 'preset' or 'index' property.

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 plugin_preset_count, plugin_next_preset, plugin_prev_preset, or other plugin-related tools. No prerequisites or validation steps are mentioned, so an agent must infer usage entirely from context.

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