input_preset_apply

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses idempotency, which is valuable, but does not mention whether applying a preset overwrites existing custom mappings or any other side effects. The behavioral disclosure is partial but not contradictory.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with verb and resource, and every word earns its place. The enumeration of presets and idempotency note are efficiently packed with no redundancy.

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 single-enum-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it covers the parameter values, behavior (idempotent), and expected actions. Missing is any mention of how existing keybindings are affected, which would make it fully 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description explains that the preset includes WASD movement, mouse look, and Jump/Fire/Interact actions, adding meaning beyond the raw enum list. It does not detail each preset individually, but the general explanation compensates well for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 the tool applies a standard control scheme preset and enumerates the four specific values (first_person, third_person, top_down, tank). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like input_mapping_add/remove.

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 implies usage by listing preset types and their contents, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus manual input mapping alternatives. The context of sibling tools suggests alternatives, but no exclusionary or comparative guidance is given.

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