list_export_presets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Returns export presets' is essentially a paraphrase of the tool name and reveals nothing about the nature of the return value, ordering, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 clear sentence that is appropriately short for a parameterless getter. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with no verbosity. It could benefit from a touch more context but remains efficient.

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 tool, the description is almost sufficient. However, it does not explain what export presets are or how they might be used, which could be relevant for an agent deciding whether to call this tool. Given the lack of annotations and schema detail, a bit more context would make it more complete.

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?

There are zero parameters, so no parameter documentation is needed. The schema already covers everything (100% coverage with no properties). The description adds no parameter meaning but none is required, so a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 clear verb ('Returns') and a specific resource ('export presets'). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like export_project, the name itself makes the purpose unambiguous. It lacks explicit sibling differentiation, so a 4 is appropriate.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, common use cases, or what distinguishes it from export_project or get_project_settings. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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