get_encoder_presets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that it returns 'readable' presets and admits that factory preset enumeration is incomplete, which are useful behavioral details. However, it does not explain the return format, default folder behavior, or error handling, leaving some gaps.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a relevant caveat. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 simple discovery tool, it covers the key limitation (factory presets not complete). However, there is no output schema and no description of the return value or how the discovered presets can be used with sibling encoding tools, leaving the agent to infer the result format.

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 100%, with a clear description of the optional 'directories' parameter. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already provides full meaning, so a baseline 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 states the tool's function: discovering readable user Adobe Media Encoder .epr presets from local AME preset folders. It uses a specific verb (discovers) and a specific resource, and the caveat about factory presets clarifies its scope, distinguishing it from potential preset enumeration tools.

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 when to use the tool (for discovering user presets) but does not explicitly compare against alternatives or state when not to use it. The schema provides guidance for the optional directories parameter, but the overall usage context is only implied.

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