ae_remove_effect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. 'Remove' implies a mutating operation, but the description doesn't disclose what happens on a missing effect, whether removal is reversible, or what state changes are made to the layer.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core action and selection method without any filler.

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 six parameters, none required, and no annotations or output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: how to identify the composition and layer, whether both name and index forms are alternatives, and what a successful removal returns. An agent would need to infer standard patterns from sibling tools.

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 coverage is 67%, and the description adds meaning to the two undocumented parameters (effect_name, effect_index) by presenting them as the selection keys. However, it doesn't clarify whether both can be used together or how they relate to comp/layer parameters.

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 action ('remove'), the resource ('an effect'), and the location ('from a layer'), plus the two selection methods (effect_name or effect_index). This distinguishes it from siblings like ae_apply_effect and ae_set_effect_property.

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 about when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as ae_list_effects or ae_set_effect_property. It also doesn't explain selection strategy between effect_name and effect_index, or mention required composition/layer identifiers.

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