ae_addLight

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the description needn't repeat the safety profile. It adds that the tool creates a light with configurable color, intensity percentage, position, cone angle/feather, and shadow casting, but it does not describe side effects, permissions, or what happens when parameters are omitted.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently packs the core operation and supported properties. The dash-separated list is dense but not wasteful.

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 10-parameter creation tool with low schema coverage, the description covers purpose and many parameter names but leaves gaps around defaults, requiredness (none are required), value ranges, and return behavior. The compositionName schema note helps, but the description itself remains thin for a mutation operation.

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 10%, so the description must compensate. It identifies most parameters and adds semantics such as 'intensity %' and 'cone angle/feather', but omits explanation for name, shadowDarkness, and the format of position or color arrays.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'add a light' in After Effects, and enumerates the supported light types (point, spot, parallel, ambient). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ae_addCamera or ae_addSolid, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 states what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites such as needing an open composition. Usage is only implied by the operation name.

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