list_presets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation via 'List' and states that the content is fixed and built-in. It does not describe the return format, but there is no hint of side effects or hidden behavior.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase adds information: the action, the count, the type of content, and the specific names. This is an ideal length for a simple listing 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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is nearly complete. It specifies exactly what is returned—four named demo briefs. The only minor gap is that it does not describe the object shape of each brief, but the context is simple enough that the names largely suffice.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. With no parameters, the baseline of 4 applies; the description's enumeration of the exact demo brief names adds useful context beyond the empty schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and names the exact resource: the four built-in demo briefs, including each name. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like draft_plan or validate_addon, which perform different actions.

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 usage is implied rather than explicit: if an agent needs the built-in demo briefs, this is the tool to call. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, leaving some room for inference.

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