Manage presets

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

Annotation Contradiction: The description explicitly includes 'delete' as a core action, implying destructive side effects, while annotations declare destructiveHint=false. This is a serious inconsistency. The description does disclose persistence and pairing, but the contradiction with the destructiveHint annotation warrants a score of 1.

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 sentences, led by the action list and followed by integration and persistence context. No filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

The description covers the tool's core purpose, integration and persistence, but with no output schema it leaves unclear the return format of 'list' and the exact effects of 'recall' (e.g., whether it overwrites only specified params). The annotation contradiction also undermines completeness for assessing risks.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters (action, name, params, comp_path). The description adds only metaphorical context ('snapshot the knob positions') and does not clarify parameter formatting or required values beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb list ('Store, recall, list, or delete') and identifies the exact resource ('named snapshots of a COMP's parameter values'), making the tool's scope unmistakable. It also distinguishes itself from generic storage tools by framing it as the live-performance preset system and pointing to create_control_panel as a companion.

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 clear usage context—snapshot knob positions from a control panel and jump between looks—and explicitly pairs it with create_control_panel. It lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance versus sibling tools like manage_cue or create_preset_morph.

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