list-presets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it lists presets from folders, but does not disclose whether After Effects needs to be running, whether it is a purely filesystem read, what format results take, or potential performance impacts of recursive search. The verb 'list' implies a read operation, but key behavioral details are absent.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and contains no extraneous information. It is appropriately concise for the tool it describes, earning its place with every word.

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?

With no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., an array of file paths). It also does not mention any prerequisites, such as whether After Effects must be running, or how it compares to sibling tools. The schema covers parameters, but the overall context for using the tool is incomplete, especially given the presence of similarly named tools.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already provides detailed parameter semantics, including defaults and constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond mentioning 'common or provided folders,' which loosely maps to 'presetRoots' but adds no new information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'List available After Effects .ffx presets from common or provided folders,' which uses a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('.ffx presets'), and scope (folders). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search-presets' (search vs. list) and 'apply-preset' (apply vs. list), making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tool 'search-presets' suggests a possible distinction, but the description does not explain when to choose 'list-presets' over 'search-presets' or other tools. The usage context is entirely implied by the tool's name.

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