ae_addEffect

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the description needn't restate them. It adds useful facts: third-party plugin support, optional parameter setting, and hex color encoding. It does not say what happens on an unknown effect name or whether params are partial vs. 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 tight sentences; the capability and its flexibility are front-loaded and the discovery hint trails appropriately. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

Covers the hard parts an agent needs - effect identification format, value typing for properties, and how to find valid effects - with no output schema to explain a return value. Minor gap is the undocumented 'name' parameter, which leaves some ambiguity for a 5-param, nested-object 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?

At 40% schema coverage, the description compensates well for 'effect' (display name or matchName) and 'properties' ({paramName: value}, colors as hex). However, the bare 'name' string parameter is unexplained and the description adds nothing for 'layer' or 'compositionName' beyond the schema text.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('add ANY effect') and explicitly scopes it to both built-in and third-party plugins, with identification by display name or matchName. An agent can distinguish this from ae_setEffectProperties or ae_applyPreset without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit discovery guidance ('Use ae_listEffects to discover installed effects'), which is the key prerequisite before calling. It stops short of saying when to use ae_setEffectProperties afterwards or how ae_applyPreset differs, so alternatives are only partially covered.

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