lightroom_compare_develop_presets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It adds a useful behavioral guarantee ('deterministic per-setting diff') and implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't clarify input expectations, side effects, or behavior when settings are missing or unordered.

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 12-word sentence that front-loads the operation and output. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundant detail.

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?

The output schema likely covers the return format, but the critical input ambiguity and lack of usage context leave an agent unsure how to structure the required arguments. For a tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 must compensate. It only says 'two Develop presets' and gives no detail on whether base/candidate should be preset names, IDs, or full settings objects. The schema's additionalProperties:true provides no further structure, leaving the agent to guess the argument format.

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 operation ('compare') on a clear resource ('two Develop presets') and specifies the exact outcome ('deterministic per-setting diff'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like apply, create, or export 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 verb 'compare' implies when to use it, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_develop_preset or apply_develop_preset. It also doesn't mention any prerequisites or context such as whether the presets must already exist or be loaded.

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