ae_link_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It states the tool creates an expression link, but does not mention that it modifies the property expression, or whether it overwrites existing expressions. It also does not specify required permissions or any side effects.

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 relatively concise (two sentences plus a brief example) but could be more structured. It front-loads the core action but the example is woven into the first sentence, which may reduce clarity.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to cover important context like what happens after the expression is applied, preconditions (e.g., comp and layer must exist), or error states. It is insufficient for a complex mutation tool.

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 targetProperty has a description). The description adds value by noting that targetProperty defaults to the same as property, but does not explain the other parameters (comp, layer, property, targetLayer). With low schema coverage, the description should compensate more.

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 links one property to another via an expression, with a concrete example (linking an icon's Scale to its container's Scale). It also mentions defaulting the target property to the same name as the source. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ae_add_bounce_expression or ae_animate_transform, which do different things.

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 gives a specific use-case example but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like ae_parent_layer or ae_animate_transform. It lacks exclusion criteria or context about when not to use it.

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