set_effects

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Set effects' but does not clarify whether this replaces existing effects entirely, merges with them, or requires certain permissions. The behavioral implications (e.g., overwriting vs. appending) are not addressed.

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 concise sentence that conveys the core functionality. It is front-loaded and efficient, but could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 required params, no output schema), the description is minimally viable. It lacks details on whether effects are replaced or merged, how to remove effects, or what happens if invalid parameters are provided. The return value is also unexplained.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters. The description enumerates effect types, but the schema's enum for the 'type' field already lists exactly those values. Thus, the description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Set effects on a node' and lists the specific effect types (drop shadow, inner shadow, layer blur, background blur). This differentiates it from sibling tools like set_fill_color or set_stroke_color, which modify other visual properties.

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 description implies when to use this tool (when setting effects), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to other set tools that might affect appearance (e.g., set_opacity, set_fill_color). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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