ae_add_effect

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool adds an effect and returns parameter names, but lacks information on error behavior, idempotency, or side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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. Every word serves a purpose, providing essential information about the action, parameters, and return value efficiently.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality and return value. It lacks details on optional parameters (comp) and error conditions, but is largely complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 only 33% (effect parameter has a description). The description adds value by explaining the effect parameter can be a display name or match-name with examples, but provides no additional meaning for the 'comp' or 'layer' parameters, partially compensating for the low coverage.

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 tool adds an effect to a layer by name or match-name, and distinguishes itself by noting it returns parameter names for use with ae_set_effect_param. This sets it apart from sibling tools that add specific effects.

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 implies usage for arbitrary effects but does not explicitly mention when to use this generic tool versus sibling tools like ae_add_drop_shadow. No exclusion criteria or alternative guidance is provided.

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