list_hull_presets

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/destructive/closed-world, and the description confirms 'Read-only' while adding the useful trait that these are built-in (i.e., a fixed, non-user-mutable set) rather than user-authored designs. It stops short of anything like ordering, count, or pagination, but with annotations this rich and an output schema present, that is a modest gap.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and its contents, then downstream usage, then sibling disambiguation — a sensible priority order. The trailing 'Read-only.' repeats the annotation and is the one sentence that doesn't fully earn 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, annotated, output-schema-backed catalog tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly or act on the result is missing: it knows what comes back, that it is a fixed built-in set, and what to feed the names into next.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description usefully defines what a preset name *is* in this system by describing how it is consumed downstream by preview_hull, save_hull and get_hull_spec.

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+resource ('List the built-in boat hull presets') and enumerates exactly what each entry contains (name, one-line description, dimensions, interior flag). It also explicitly names the two nearest lookalikes, list_designs and list_game_vehicles, so an agent can separate the preset catalog from stored or saved vehicles without opening a schema.

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?

Tells the agent what to do with the output: pass a returned name as `preset` to preview_hull or save_hull, or to get_hull_spec for the full value set. Alternatives are routed explicitly (list_designs for stored designs, list_game_vehicles for the player's saved vehicles), which is a complete when/when-not map for a catalog tool.

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