get_preset

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral caveat that authorization may be required depending on rights, which is not present in the annotations.

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 only two short sentences, with the core behavior front-loaded and no filler, redundancy, or restatement of the tool name.

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, optional-parameter read operation with a clear schema and read-only annotations, the description is adequate: it specifies that either a single preset or all presets can be returned and warns about authorization. It could mention the response shape, but the tool's low complexity makes this a minor gap.

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 already documents the sole parameter id with a description covering the optional-ID behavior ('без него — список всех'). Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 identifies a specific resource (presets) and action (retrieve information), and clarifies the optional scope: a specific preset or all presets. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like list_presets or search_presets, leaving differentiation implicit.

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 conveys the basic use case and notes that authorization may be required depending on permissions. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer get_preset over the closely related list_presets or search_presets tools, so usage context is implied rather than stated.

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