get_rename_preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It simply says 'Get a rename preset' without mentioning what happens if the ID is not found, whether it returns the full object, or if any permissions are required. This is minimal disclosure for a read operation.

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 one short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It wastes no words and is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool.

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 CRUD getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could explicitly state 'by ID' to align with the schema, but the overall tool is simple enough that this description suffices.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with the 'id' parameter described as 'ID of the resource'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Get a rename preset' clearly identifies the operation (get) and the resource (rename preset). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_rename_presets, create_rename_preset, update_rename_preset, and delete_rename_preset.

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 implies use when a single rename preset is needed by ID, but provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives. Sibling tools like list_rename_presets suggest the alternative for listing all presets, but the description itself doesn't mention this.

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