prismmoves_preset_legacy

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: the call is asynchronous and returns a background job handle, and the base effect is a write with inference/download effects being conditional on component inspection. This is exactly the kind of effect disclosure a caller needs, and it is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with purpose before mechanics. The telegraphic 'Base effect flags: write' phrasing is slightly clipped but every sentence carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shape needn't be described, and the async/job-handle behavior is covered. However, for a tool with two required nested arguments and a permissions object, the description omits what the primary inputs mean and what the replay produces.

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 50% and the description never explains 'reports', 'output', or 'budget'. It does add meaning to the permissions sub-flags by identifying write as the base effect and inference/download as conditional, which partially compensates but leaves the core arguments opaque.

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: replaying retained legacy preset reports without new model inference. The 'legacy' and 'retained' qualifiers implicitly separate it from prismmoves_preset_analyse and prismmoves_preset_reindex, though no sibling is named 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?

Gives post-call guidance (poll danceflow_job_status, inspect danceflow_component for conditional effects) but never states when to choose this over the sibling preset tools. Usage is implied by the 'legacy retained reports' framing rather than declared.

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