plugin_preset_save

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states that a preset ID is returned, but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether the current plugin state is modified, whether the operation is destructive, or whether it requires specific permissions). The vague 'apply a program' wording adds confusion rather than clarity.

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 short, but conciseness is not a virtue here because it omits critical operational details. The single sentence is under-specified and does not earn its brevity; it leaves too much to inference.

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 high complexity of the input schema (nested objects, arrays, constraints) and the absence of any annotations or output schema, the description is grossly inadequate. It does not explain the meaning of 'program', 'normalized parameters', the plugin object's fields, or how the preset ID is used. An agent would struggle to construct a valid request without additional context.

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 schema has 0% coverage from the description, and the description only vaguely references 'program/normalized parameters' without explaining the structure of the 'plugin' object, the 'name' field, or the 'tags' field. Required parameters like 'name' and the nested 'plugin' object are not described at all, leaving the agent without guidance on how to populate them correctly.

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 clearly states the action (save a named state preset) and the resource (plugin preset), and mentions the return value (preset ID). However, the phrase 'Apply a program/normalized parameters' is ambiguous and does not clearly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like content_bind_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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., requiring an existing plugin) or exclusions. The sibling list includes content_bind_preset which may be related, but no differentiation is provided.

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