list_export_presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful constraint that no project context is required, but the phrase 'complete portable settings, default ID and name limit' is too compressed to convey clearly what each preset entry contains.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb first and no filler. The trailing clause about 'default ID and name limit' is dense to the point of ambiguity, which slightly hurts comprehension even though brevity is good.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned, and while it gestures at preset contents and a name limit, it does not make the return shape or ordering clear. For a trivial parameterless list tool this is close to adequate, but an agent cannot predict the response structure from it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters and the schema is an empty object, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline for a parameterless tool applies and nothing misleads.

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?

Names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('export presets') with a scope qualifier ('built-in and personal'), which distinguishes it from the sibling write tools create_export_preset, update_export_preset and delete_export_preset. It stops short of distinguishing it from get_export_options, which an agent might reasonably confuse it with.

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?

'Available without a project' gives one concrete precondition, implying it can be called before a project is opened. There is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over get_export_options or how it pairs with start_export, so alternatives are only weakly implied.

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