Session context

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: the compact-vs-full default and what the full mode unlocks (item list, helpers, ES3 rules, tips, undo contract). It stops short of describing output shape, but with annotations carrying the safety profile this is solid added 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, zero waste, front-loaded with the returned contents before the usage directive. Every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the work of telling the agent what comes back in both modes and when to call. It is nearly complete for a read-only context tool; only the resident/instance addressing details live purely in the schema, which is acceptable.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description earns above baseline by enumerating what detail:'full' actually returns (helpers, ES3 rules, tips, undo contract), giving semantic weight the enum values alone don't convey.

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 resource set (project state, active comp, selected layers, resident readiness), which clearly separates it from siblings like ae_project_info or ae_comp_info. The verb 'ambient context' is slightly abstract but the enumerated contents make the purpose concrete.

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 says 'Call at session start; then rely on ae_do response context,' giving clear when-to-use and a routing rule to the follow-up sibling. No explicit when-not condition, but the sequencing guidance is unambiguous.

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