ytptube_patch_preset

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it is a partial update (only specified fields change) and that default presets cannot be patched, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose error behavior for invalid IDs or attempting to patch a default preset.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It contains zero wasted words and is appropriately sized for its purpose.

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 tool with a nested 'changes' object, no output schema, and no mention of failure modes or prerequisites beyond 'non-default', the description is too minimal. It lacks details about what happens on success/failure, whether a default preset causes an error, and how the 'changes' object should be structured, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.

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 must compensate. It does not explain that 'id' identifies the preset or that 'changes' contains the subset of fields to update. While property names are self-explanatory, the description adds no value beyond the schema, leaving the nested 'changes' object's semantics underspecified.

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 identifies the action (partial update), the resource (download preset), and a key constraint (non-default). This distinguishes it from siblings like update_preset and create_preset, which would be full updates or creation.

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 for partial modifications of existing non-default presets but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus update_preset or create_preset. It mentions the non-default constraint but offers no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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