List presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the default filtering of system presets, the hidden_system output field, and a prerequisite 'needs preset/save build'. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose and each sentence adds useful detail. The 'F12:' prefix is slightly cryptic, but the content is packed without waste. It is longer than a one-liner but appropriately detailed for a tool with nuanced default behavior.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description partially explains the return via 'List ... presets with flags' and the hidden_system field. It covers invocation, default behavior, parameter use, and a prerequisite. It could be more explicit about the exact return structure, but it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 is the sole source of parameter meaning. It clearly explains include_system ('Pass include_system=True for the full list') and type ('type='print'|'filament'|'printer' to restrict to one category'), including allowed values. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 'List print/filament/printer presets' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_preset_config by focusing on the listing action. It also mentions the system/selected/visible flags, adding to specificity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use the default behavior (user presets + selected) versus passing include_system=True, and when to restrict by type. It also warns about the 'noise' of system presets. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like get_preset_config or select_preset, but the context is clear enough.

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