reaper_list_fx_presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying the exact return structure (count, current_index, presets array) and that it lists 'every preset' plus selection. No contradictions. Could mention error handling or permissions, but not necessary for a read tool.

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: the first states the action, the second gives the return format. No filler, front-loaded, every word earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 required params, read-only, idempotent), the description plus schema provide sufficient context. The output schema is provided inline. Could mention error cases, but for a list operation it's complete enough.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with resource 'presets for an FX instance', and mentions returning current selection. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'reaper_set_fx_preset' (set) and 'reaper_list_fx_params' (list parameters).

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 reading presets of a specific FX instance. It does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but the purpose is clear and the sibling tools are distinct. No exclusion or alternative mentioned, but given the straightforward read operation, it's clear enough.

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