ae_reconnect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the visible side effect (brief 'Executing script…' dialog) and the rate limit ('30s cooldown'). It does not explain what internal state changes, prerequisites, or risks a reconnect involves, so some opacity remains.

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 compact sentences each carry distinct information: constraint, action plus visible effect, alternative, and cooldown. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description supplies the key call-time facts: when it may be used, what the user sees, and the cooldown. It could mention success/failure behavior, but the core invocation context is covered.

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?

The schema has zero properties with 100% coverage, so there are no parameters to document and the baseline is 4. The description's command and dialog context is a bonus rather than a necessity.

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 concrete action ('Runs AfterFX -r once') and scopes it with 'USER-INITIATED ONLY', making the reconnect intent clear from the name plus verb. It doesn't explicitly define what reconnecting changes internally, but it is specific enough to distinguish this from sibling maintenance tools.

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?

It gives an explicit alternative ('Prefer restarting AE instead for a silent Startup load') and a hard usage constraint ('USER-INITIATED ONLY') plus a cooldown. An agent knows this is the manual, visible reconnect path and that silent startup should be handled by restarting AE instead.

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