Save a named, reusable media transform preset so you can apply consistent image, video, or document settings anywhere using a preset key.
Saves a named transform, applied anywhere with transform preset: key.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | Lowercase letters, digits, _. | |
| name | Yes | Human-readable name. | |
| transform | Yes | Must include `format`. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description usefully adds how the created key is consumed elsewhere, but it does not say what happens on a duplicate key (relevant given idempotentHint=false), whether an existing preset is overwritten, or what errors to expect.
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?
A single well-formed sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. The trailing clause is slightly terse and takes a second read, but nothing is wasted.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the nested transform fields are fully documented in the schema. Still, for a non-idempotent create tool the description omits key-uniqueness/overwrite behavior and any mention of the sibling preset-listing tool.
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%, including the note that `transform` must include `format`, so the schema carries most of the burden. The description does add meaning for `key` by showing it is the reference value used as `preset: key` elsewhere, which is a modest but real contribution above the schema's pattern note.
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 states a specific verb and resource ('Saves a named transform') and clarifies what a saved preset is for. It does not name the sibling `list_presets` or otherwise differentiate from related tools, so it stops short of a 5.
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 phrase 'applied anywhere with transform `preset`: key' implies the use case (define once, reuse by key), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of `list_presets` as the alternative for inspecting existing presets.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.