adobe_setup

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

Annotations only declare it is not read-only and not destructive; the description adds substantive context beyond that, disclosing that it modifies system-wide security settings (enabling unsigned CEP extensions and AE network/file-writing scripts) and that an app restart is required. It stops short of saying whether the operation is idempotent or how to undo the preference changes.

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?

A single compact sentence enumerating the three setup actions, followed by a short imperative restart note. Front-loaded with the one-time setup framing and zero filler.

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?

For a mutating setup tool with no output schema, the description covers the main effects and the required restart. Remaining gaps are the meaning of skipAePrefs and any sense of whether the call reports per-app success or failure, but the essential operational picture is there.

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 single parameter skipAePrefs has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned or explained in the description. The text references the AE scripting preference the flag presumably controls, but the agent cannot infer what passing true versus false does, so the gap is not compensated.

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 names specific actions and targets: installs the Adobe Studio MCP Hub CEP extension across four apps, enables unsafe CEP extension loading (PlayerDebugMode), and flips a specific After Effects scripting preference. An agent can tell it apart from per-app tools, though it doesn't clarify its relationship to siblings like adobe_installPlugin or adobe_togglePlugin, which also touch plugins/extensions.

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?

'One-time setup / repair' implies when to reach for it, and 'Restart the apps afterwards' gives an operational follow-up. But there is no explicit when-not guidance and no comparison to the potentially overlapping adobe_installPlugin, adobe_togglePlugin, or adobe_extensions tools, leaving the agent to infer which to call.

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