apply_preset

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

Discloses that the operation applies a style to multiple photos and returns applied/missed counts, implying a batch mutation. No annotations exist, so it carries more burden; however, it does not state side effects like whether an existing style is overwritten, but the return counts provide useful 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the action, and includes necessary operational preconditions. Slightly more than minimal but each sentence adds value; no fluff.

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?

Covers what it does, the exact-match source, required runtime, and return counts. With no annotations and no output schema, this is reasonably complete for a batch operation, though it doesn't mention error cases or whether partial failures occur; still adequate.

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 the description reinforces the exact-match constraint already in the schema. It adds nuance that preset_name must match a style name from list_styles, clarifying the enum-like source beyond the schema, which benefits selection.

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?

States a specific verb (apply), the resource (darktable style/preset), the target (one or more photos) and the requ�rement of an exact style name, distinguishing it from sibling import/export/rate tools.

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?

Explicitly requires the preset_name to come from list_styles and notes darktable must be running with the plugin, giving clear preconditions. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use, but the exact-match instruction and mention of list_styles effectively routes the agent to the correct sibling tool.

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