List CMake presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds useful context by naming the two files consulted and noting that binary directories are resolved, but says nothing about behavior when the file is absent or about the returned preset fields.

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 covering source files, scope, and the resolved-binary-directory detail with no filler or redundancy.

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 read-only list tool whose annotations cover safety and whose lone parameter is fully documented in the schema, the description is essentially sufficient. Only minor gaps remain: no mention of error behavior when no presets exist and no note on ordering or which preset set (configure vs build) is returned first.

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 100% and there is a single sourceDir parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description's phrase 'of a source directory' restates rather than extends the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb (Lists) plus resource (configure and build presets) and the exact source files read (CMakePresets.json / CMakeUserPresets.json), including the extra detail that binary directories are resolved. It is distinguishable from every sibling, though the differentiation is implicit rather than stated since no sibling touches presets.

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 explicit guidance on when to reach for this tool versus alternatives like list_projects or get_project_summary, nor any prerequisite or failure condition (e.g., what happens when no presets file exists). Usage is only inferable from the purpose sentence.

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