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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that clearing is supported, which is useful, but it does not explain what clearing affects, how destruction applies to shape_ids, or any permission/scope constraints.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. The terse style is appropriate for the description itself, even though important details are missing elsewhere.

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 destructive mutation tool with 7 parameters, nested objects, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits required shape targeting, region vs. artboard behavior, shadow array semantics, and clearing mechanics.

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 0%, with 7 parameters including nested shadow objects and region/artboard targeting. The description mentions blur, shadows, and opacity but does not explain required shape_ids, region, artboard, shadow vs. shadows, color, or how clearing is expressed.

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 specific verb and effects: setting blur, shadows, opacity, or clearing them. It is understandable despite the vague tool name 'set_filter', though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby style/filter-related siblings.

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 phrase 'or clear them' implies a removal mode, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or which sibling tool to use for related style effects.

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