Enqueue After Effects Render

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

Annotations already declare it is not read-only, not idempotent, not open-world, and not destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those hints: it saves the open project but never starts rendering or overwrites output, and it requires explicit confirmation. This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and safety constraints.

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 tightly written sentences that front-load the core action and then immediately state the confirmation requirement and critical side effects. No filler or repetition; every phrase carries information.

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?

Given that annotations cover safety and the output schema exists, the description is largely complete for safe use. It could optionally mention the prerequisite of verifying an After Effects connection or explicitly name the preview tool as the source of the token, but the schema already documents the token's origin, so the gap is minor.

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 two parameters (preview_token and confirm_enqueue) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds 'previewed' and 'exactly one' but does not elaborate on parameter format, source, or usage beyond what is already in 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?

States a precise verb (queue) and resource (exactly one previewed After Effects render with named host templates), and the word 'previewed' distinguishes it from a direct render or preview tool. An agent can tell it apart from siblings like preview_after_effects_render and apply_after_effects_render_handoff without opening the schema.

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?

The description clearly implies the tool is used after a preview ('previewed render') and that explicit confirmation is required, which maps to the confirm_enqueue parameter. It does not explicitly name the preview tool or state when not to use it, but the context and constraints are clear enough for correct invocation.

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