ae_create_composition

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

The description discloses default behavior (1920x1080, 30fps, 5 seconds) and the bgColor input format, which is useful since no annotations are provided. However, it does not describe side effects, connection requirements, return values, or error behavior for a mutating operation.

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?

Two sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the operation before defaults. Every word adds value.

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 simple creation tool the essentials are covered, but with no output schema or annotations, the description should at least mention what callers get back or any side effect on the active project. PixelAspect semantics and lifecycle context are also omitted.

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 only 43%, but the description compensates for several properties by stating resolution, fps, duration, and a bgColor example. It does not clarify pixelAspect, which remains under-documented.

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 action and resource: 'Create a new composition' — a clear verb plus object. It differentiates the tool from sibling creation tools like ae_create_layer and ae_create_subtitle, and from inspection tools like ae_get_composition.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to favor ae_create_layer or ae_import_footage instead.

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