Lists built-in geometric pattern and texture background presets to help agents choose backgrounds for graphic designs. Use it to browse available options before applying a style.
Lists all built-in geometric pattern and texture background presets (Dot Matrix, Technical Blueprint, Carbon Fiber, Diagonal Stripes, 3D Isometric Wireframe, Topography, Circuit Board).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the exact contents returned (the seven preset names), which is real behavioral value, but it never states that this is a read-only, side-effect-free enumeration or mentions any pagination/auth behavior.
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 and resource first and the enumeration following. Every token earns its place; there is no filler.
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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is largely complete because the enumeration substitutes for a return-value schema. The only missing piece is a pointer to the sibling that consumes these patterns.
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, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify beyond confirming the listing is unfiltered.
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 verb (Lists) and a precisely bounded resource (built-in geometric pattern and texture background presets), then enumerates the actual presets. An agent can tell it apart from canvas_set_pattern by name, but the description never names or contrasts with that sibling.
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?
No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and the relevant alternative (canvas_set_pattern, which presumably applies one of these) is not mentioned. Usage is only implied: an agent lists presets to discover names before applying them.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.