rba_run_preset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'run a built-in Lua preset' without warning that many presets have side effects (e.g., teleporting, saving state, installing runtimes), require connected clients, or may execute arbitrary Lua code on clients.

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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It efficiently communicates the core action and receives full credit for conciseness.

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 tool has no annotations and no output schema, yet the description gives no context about return values, error behavior, side effects, or preconditions. The preset enum includes potentially dangerous actions (teleport_to_spawn, install_console_mirror), but the description provides no warning or usage context, leaving the agent under-informed for a tool of this complexity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds minimal parameter meaning. It clarifies that presets are 'built-in Lua' and clients are 'development', but it does not explain the 'target' parameter's allowed values (all/first/integer) or default behavior, nor does it enumerate any preset semantics beyond the schema enum.

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 uses a specific verb ('Run') and clearly identifies the resource ('built-in Lua preset') and target ('connected development clients'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like rba_list_presets (which lists presets) and rba_run_script_profile (which runs script profiles, not 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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives or what prerequisites exist. It does not mention related tools like rba_list_presets for discovering available presets, nor does it explain when not to use this tool.

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