set_effects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'Add'. It does not disclose whether the operation replaces existing effects or appends to them, how preset interacts with shadow, or whether multiple effect types can be set in one call.

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 eight-word sentence that front-loads the key effect types. Every word adds signal, and there is no redundant boilerplate.

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?

The tool has six parameters, one enum, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, but the description only names the effect categories. Missing context includes parameter combination rules, effect replacement behavior, and usage boundaries between this tool and its effect-related siblings.

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 adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it does not explain the relationship between preset and shadow or the nested structure 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 gives a specific verb and resource: it adds shadows, blur, or background blur effects to a node, which separates it from fill/stroke/transform tools. It does not, however, explain how it differs from the overlapping siblings apply_backdrop_blur or create_shadow_system.

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 about when to use set_effects versus apply_backdrop_blur, create_shadow_system, set_blend_mode, or the remove_effects tools. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing clues in the description.

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