ae_add_gaussian_blur

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions keyframing via atTime, but fails to describe if the operation is destructive, whether it modifies the original layer, or any prerequisites (e.g., comp and layer existence). The tool mutates the composition state, but this is not stated.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could be slightly expanded for clarity on parameters.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits important context like default behavior, prerequisites (e.g., comp must exist), and return value (void or something). The agent would struggle to use this tool correctly without further knowledge.

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 only 20% (only atTime has a description). The description adds minimal parameter context (blurriness and keyframing) but does not explain comp, layer, or repeatEdgePixels. It does not compensate for the low schema 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 it adds Gaussian Blur to a layer and mentions two usage cases (depth and keyframing). It distinguishes from sibling tools like ae_add_drop_shadow or ae_add_glow by specifying the exact effect. However, it could be more specific about the scope (e.g., whether it applies to all layers or selected ones).

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 provides some usage guidance (small amount for depth, keyframe for focus pull/transition) but does not specify when not to use it or compare to alternatives like ae_add_effect which might also add Gaussian Blur. It lacks explicit exclusions or when to prefer other tools.

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