get_preset_metadata

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context by naming the exact fields read and the single-preset scope, but it does not describe response shape or error behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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 no filler. Every word contributes meaning: it states the verb, the specific metadata fields, and the scope of one preset.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with clear annotations and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies the parameter required, the scope, and the fields returned. A minor gap is the lack of detail about the exact JSON shape of the returned metadata, but this is a small omission for such a simple read operation.

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 input schema already documents presetId as a 'Stable NKS preset catalog ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond reinforcing that the operation addresses one preset, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a read action and a specific resource: user tags, favorite state, and revision for one preset. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_preset (full preset data) and set_preset_metadata (the write counterpart) without requiring the schema.

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 the use case: call this when you need metadata fields for a single preset. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over related tools such as get_browser_item_metadata or get_preset, nor does it mention exclusions, so usage guidance is only implied.

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