baker_save_preset

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation. The description adds that it saves the bake project's configuration as a named preset, but omits important behavior such as whether an existing preset with the same name is overwritten.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 and annotations reduce what the description must cover. However, for a mutation tool with a completely undocumented 'baker' parameter and no overwrite semantics, the description leaves meaningful gaps.

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%, so the description needs to carry parameter meaning. It signals that 'name' is the preset name, but the second parameter 'baker' (integer/string/null) is completely unexplained, leaving ambiguity about whether it selects a baker or specifies a bake 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?

It uses a specific verb-resource pair: save the bake project's configuration as a named preset. The operation is clear, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from baker_load_preset or baker_set_settings.

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 versus baker_load_preset, baker_set_settings, or baker_create. The name implies saving a preset, but the description provides no conditional context or exclusions.

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