create_with_preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals a default branch behavior, but does not mention side effects of adding projects, the dry_run option, or any potential destructive actions. It implies mutation (creates/adds) but lacks depth.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the primary action and adds a useful default rule, though it could include more structured details without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, multiple sibling tools, and an output schema), this description is notably incomplete. It doesn't explain the output, prerequisites, or how preset projects interact with existing tasks. The output schema exists, but the behavioral context is too thin for reliable agent use.

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%, and the description only implicitly references 'task', 'preset', and 'branch'. It adds context for the branch default but does nothing to explain base_overrides, branch_overrides, dry_run, or product_root, leaving the agent to guess their meaning.

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 states the tool creates a task and adds preset projects, which distinguishes it from siblings like create_task and add_project. However, it doesn't elaborate on what a 'preset' is or how projects are added, so it stops short of full clarity.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus create_task or add_project. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage based on the name and context.

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