design_list_pattern_presets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'List' plus 'grouped by category, with descriptions' discloses the read-only nature and the return shape, which is genuinely useful since there is no output schema. It says nothing about ordering, pagination, or result size, so the disclosure is adequate rather than thorough.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the resource and the grouping behavior front-loaded and the usage cue second. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description supplies the essential return-shape information (grouped by category, each with a description) and the workflow context that precedes adding a pattern layer. It stops short of explaining how a discovered preset is consumed by design_add_pattern, which would have closed the loop fully.

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 100% and the single category parameter is a fully enumerated string with a documented default of 'all'. The description's 'grouped by category' hints at the grouping behavior but adds no filtering semantics beyond what the enum already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: list all available pattern presets, grouped by category with descriptions. The resource is specific enough to separate it from the many other list_* siblings (design_list_fill_presets, design_list_brushes, design_list_trace_presets), though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it: 'Use this to discover presets before adding a pattern layer,' which places it as the discovery step ahead of design_add_pattern. There is no when-not condition or named alternative, which keeps it short of a 5.

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