list_decoration_presets

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavior, and it does disclose one meaningful constraint: 'Requires Kiln Pro' with an upgrade path — useful gating information an agent cannot get from the schema. However, it says nothing about ordering, whether archived presets are excluded (only implied by a param default), pagination, or result size.

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?

The core sentence is efficient and front-loaded, but the second paragraph is marketing copy ('Kiln Pro would save this as a reusable feature…') plus an upgrade URL that consumes roughly half the text without helping the agent invoke the tool.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should characterize the returned list (fields, ordering, version identity) and the role of design_id; it does neither. The entitlement note is the only behavioral fact supplied for a tool with three undocumented-in-prose parameters.

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 67%, and the single most consequential parameter, design_id, has no description anywhere and is never mentioned in the tool description — it is unclear whether it scopes the list to a design or is ignored. The description adds zero meaning beyond the two boolean defaults already in the 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 first sentence gives a specific verb and resource with a scope qualifier ('latest version of every decoration preset'), which implicitly contrasts with all-versions listing. It never names the closely related siblings (list_decoration_preset_versions, list_decoration_preset_releases, get_decoration_preset), so an agent must infer the distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the many preset-related siblings; the only stated condition is the Kiln Pro entitlement. No mention of when to set design_id or portfolio_only, or when to prefer a versions/releases listing.

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