polynodes_preset_slot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description only adds the 1-10 range and 'JSON confirmation', both of which are already implied by the schema and output schema, so it contributes little new behavioral context.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the core action; the Args/Returns docstring block is slightly boilerplate but costs little. No filler.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, not explaining return values is acceptable. However, the description omits what happens to the existing patch when a preset slot is loaded, which is the key behavioral fact an agent would need.

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 reported as 0% at the top level: the 'params' property has no description, though the nested PresetSlotInput.slot does carry 'Preset slot number (1 to 10)'. The description compensates by documenting 'params: slot number 1-10', clarifying the nested structure and valid range, but adds nothing beyond that.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Select a preset slot (1-10) on PolyNodes'), which is unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like polynodes_play_stop or the various setter tools, but the resource is distinct enough in context.

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 versus alternatives, what 'selecting a slot' does to the current patch state, or any prerequisites. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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