edit_preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral details. It states the operation is in-place and returns the file path. However, it does not mention whether the operation is destructive, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 three sentences long, each serving a clear purpose: stating the action, advising best practice, and stating the return value. No unnecessary 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 moderately complex editing tool, the description covers the partial update pattern, prerequisite call (describe_preset), and return value. It could mention error handling or file existence requirements, but is generally complete.

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 description adds value beyond the schema by explaining the partial update concept and giving an example of using the spec parameter. The schema has detailed sub-schemas but lacks a description for preset_path; the tool description compensates with usage context.

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 clearly states it applies a partial update to an existing .SerumPreset file in place. The verb 'apply' and resource 'SerumPreset file' are specific, and the mention of 'in place' distinguishes it from generating new presets.

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 advises calling describe_preset first to see the current state and provides an example of a partial edit (brightening the filter). It implies the tool is for modifying existing presets, but doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the sibling tool reference.

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