list_material_presets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that each preset includes a constitutive_law name and default Variables, and warns that law names should be cross-checked with the compiled build via kratos_list_constitutive_laws. This is a meaningful behavioral detail. It does not mention return format or side effects, but for a list tool these are largely implicit.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence adds valuable cross-check guidance. No filler or redundancy; every sentence 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema present, the description is complete: it explains what the presets are, what they contain, and how they should be used in a larger workflow (create_materials) while pointing to a validation step. It covers the essential context without over-explaining.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The input schema is empty and schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but none are needed.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('curated material presets'), with a clear usage context ('usable as preset in create_materials'). It also mentions that each preset carries a constitutive_law name and default Variables, distinguishing it from sibling list tools like list_linear_solver_presets.

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 gives a clear context: the presets are to be used as 'preset' in create_materials. It also instructs the agent to cross-check law names with kratos_list_constitutive_laws for the compiled build, which suggests a complementary tool. However, it does not explicitly contrast with all related list tools (e.g., list_linear_solver_presets), so it lacks explicit exclusion criteria.

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