presets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that some presets are illustrative (not measured, see spec 5.7) and that a named fetch returns SPD + metadata. This covers the key behavioral aspects for a list/fetch tool, though it doesn't mention side effects (likely none) or rate limits.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and every clause earns its place. The name enumeration is compact and the spec reference is useful without being verbose.

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 simple list/fetch behavior and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential context: available presets, the illustrative flag, and the return format. It doesn't describe behavior when no name is given (implied as listing all), but that's minor.

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 0%, but the description compensates fully by enumerating all valid preset names (D65, D50, A, FL1..FL12, LED models) and explaining the effect of providing the 'name' parameter. This is exactly the semantic detail an agent needs beyond the bare schema.

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 states the tool lists illuminant presets or fetches one by name, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from generic preset tools by specifying 'illuminant presets', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with the sibling 'list_presets' or 'quality_presets'.

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: use it to list or fetch illuminant presets. It doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like 'list_presets' or provide exclusions. The context is clear but no alternative routing is given.

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