ae_set_effect_param

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions referencing by name or 1-based index, which adds transparency. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., missing effect/parameter), whether values overwrite or merge, or the effect on existing keyframes. Adequate but incomplete.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core action, with no redundant information. Every part adds value (set effect param, keyframing option, referencing by name/index).

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?

Despite moderate schema coverage, the description does not explain return values (none in output schema), does not mention the comp and layer parameters, and lacks details on error handling or state changes. For a 6-parameter tool with no output schema, this is insufficient.

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?

The description clarifies that effect and parameter can be referenced by name or '1-based index', which is not explicit in the schema (though schema uses exclusiveMinimum:0). It also mentions keyframing 'at a time'. Schema coverage is 67% (4 of 6 params have descriptions), so the description partially compensates but does not cover comp or layer parameters.

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's function: 'Set a parameter of an effect on a layer (or keyframe it at a time).' It specifies the verb ('set'), resource ('parameter of an effect on a layer'), and includes the keyframing option. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ae_add_effect which add effects rather than modify parameters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., effect must exist) or when to avoid using it. The description lacks context for decision-making.

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