insert_content_effect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a mutation by saying 'Insert' and lists effect types, but it does not disclose required permissions, side effects, failure behavior, or how it interacts with the target layer beyond that.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. Its brevity is appropriate structurally, though it reflects under-specification rather than rich conciseness.

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 mutation tool with four parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is not complete enough to guide reliable invocation. It does not clarify required inputs, layer context, effect_type constraints, or resource_url behavior, even though an output schema exists.

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 0%, and the description only hints at acceptable effect_type values by naming Fill, Paint, Generator, Filter, Levels, and Anchor. It does not explain the required uid, optional name, or resource_url parameters, leaving most parameter semantics undocumented.

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 verb and resource: inserting content effects such as Fill, Paint, Generator, Filter, Levels, or Anchor into a layer's content. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings like insert_mask_effect or create_fill_layer/create_paint_layer.

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 such as insert_mask_effect, create_fill_layer, create_paint_layer, or insert_smart_material. The implied usage is inserting a content effect into a layer, but no exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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