ae_applyExpressionTemplate

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=false). The description adds a genuine behavioral trait beyond them: bounce/inertia/overshoot 'ride after your keyframes' and params tune the result. It does not say whether an existing expression is overwritten or what happens on failure, which matters for a mutation tool.

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?

Three tight clauses: template list, params tuning, and the keyframe-riding caveat, all front-loaded with the AE namespace. Slightly dense but no filler sentences.

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 5-param mutation tool with no output schema, it covers the template set, the params vocabulary, and an important compositing behavior. The remaining gap is overwrite/idempotency behavior, which is not addressed.

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 descriptions cover layer, property, and compositionName (60%), but the params object is an open number map with no documentation — the description compensates by naming the tuneable keys (freq/amp/decay/rate/elasticity/gravity/bounces). That is real added value over the schema, though the key-to-template mapping is left unstated.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('apply a ready-made expression') and enumerates the templates, which distinguishes it from the generic ae_setExpression sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming that alternative, so the differentiation must be inferred from the 'ready-made' framing.

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?

'After Effects:' plus the template list implies usage (pick a canned effect instead of writing an expression by hand), and the final clause hints that bounce/inertia/overshoot are meant to follow existing keyframes. However, it never states when NOT to use it or points to ae_setExpression for custom expressions.

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