list_crop_presets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. 'List' implies read-only but does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, response structure, or any authentication requirements. The description adds minimal value beyond the tool's name.

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 extremely concise at three words, but it is under-specified and essentially restates the tool name with spaces. While it is not verbose, it lacks any structured additional information (e.g., pagination or usage notes), making it minimally adequate rather than well-structured.

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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about the behavior and results of listing crop presets. It does not mention what a crop preset is, whether pagination is applicable, or any error conditions. For a simple list tool, this is incomplete.

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% parameter description coverage for 'page' and 'per_page', so the schema already explains the parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning or context for the parameters, which is consistent with the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'List crop presets' clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('crop presets'), distinguishing it from sibling operations like 'create_crop_preset' and 'list_rename_presets'. However, it is minimal and does not add scope or context (e.g., whose presets), which keeps it slightly below a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. As a listing operation, it is implicitly suitable for retrieving presets, but there is no explicit context or comparison to other list tools.

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