list_presets

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the sole source of behavioral information. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, does not describe the return format or any pagination or ordering behavior, and does not mention potential use cases or limitations. The description is purely functional and lacks behavioral depth.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. It includes a clarifying elaboration on the contents, adding value without unnecessary verbosity.

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?

While the tool is simple with no parameters, the description omits any indication of the return structure or how this relates to sibling tools like list_voices. Without an output schema, the description could be more complete by specifying typical response content or the relationship to other list tools. It is adequate but has clear gaps in context.

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 has zero parameters, so the description requirement is minimal. The description's mention of 'everything saved' appropriately indicates no filtering. Given the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools, this score is justified.

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 the verb 'List' and specifies the resource 'presets registry', further clarifying the contents as 'speaker voices and music identities'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_voices or list_speakers by anchoring to the registry concept.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_voices or list_speakers. It simply states what it does without any contextual cues, exclusions, or alternative mentions.

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