instruments_presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety burden is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful context — that presets come from a plugin installed on a track, and that 'category' corresponds to the plugin's own folders — but says nothing about behavior when the track lacks a plugin or how results are ordered across pages.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and followed by filtering/paging notes. No filler; slightly dense but every clause carries information.

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 usefully names the returned fields (name, category, path) and documents filtering and page size limits. Only edge-case behavior (no plugin on track, empty result, ordering) is left unspecified.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns above that by giving concrete query examples ('bass reese', 'leads') showing multi-word AND semantics in practice and by explaining that category maps to the plugin's folder structure.

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?

States a specific resource: preset files (.fxp) from an external plugin on a given track, with the fields returned named (name, category, path). It is not explicitly contrasted with the neighboring instruments_list or instruments_load_preset tools, but the '.fxp preset' framing makes it reasonably distinguishable.

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?

Usage is only implied — the query-filtering examples ('bass reese', 'leads') and the 'pages of up to 200' hint at search/pagination usage, but it never says when to reach for this tool versus instruments_list or instruments_load_preset, nor what happens if the track has no external plugin.

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