apply_preset

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

Annotations only say it is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, non-destructive mutation, so the description must carry the rest. It does not explain what happens to existing content, what 'append' vs 'replace' does, or whether the preset is copied or referenced. That omission is significant for a non-idempotent mutating 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?

It is one tight, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise, but that comes partly from leaving important details out.

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 4-parameter, non-idempotent mutation with no output schema and no parameter descriptions in the schema, the description is too thin. It should cover the effect of 'mode' and what the resulting group step contains.

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 needs to carry the load, but it explains only one of four parameters. 'strength = group opacity 0..1' is genuinely useful, but the 'mode' enum (append/replace) and preset_id/project_id are left undefined.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Add a preset"), but the destination concept, an "editable group step", is internal jargon that isn't self-explanatory. Siblings like list_presets/save_preset/delete_preset are clearly about preset CRUD, and this one is not, but the description doesn't clarify the distinction explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this instead of apply_to_file, edit_project, or save_preset, and no preconditions are stated. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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