ae_getProperties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral content beyond that: what the dump contains (names, matchNames, values, keys, expressions) and that it can be scoped to a sub-group path. It does not mention output size or whether the tree can be truncated by depth, which keeps it from a 5.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, that packs the return contents and the intended follow-up tools without a wasted word.

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?

There is no output schema, so it is valuable that the description enumerates the returned fields, and it names the downstream setters that consume the discovered paths. It is nearly complete, with the only real hole being the unexplained 'depth' parameter.

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 coverage is 50%: 'layer' and 'compositionName' are documented in-schema, but 'path' and 'depth' have no description anywhere. The description partially compensates by implying 'path' is a sub-group path, but it never explains what 'depth' controls or what its default is, so the gap is only half closed.

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?

Uses a specific verb ("dump the property tree") with a specific resource ("of a layer (or a sub-group path)") and enumerates exactly what is returned: names, matchNames, values, keys, expressions. An agent can distinguish this read/inspection tool from the ae_setProperty and ae_setKeyframe siblings it explicitly points to.

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?

Explicitly states the use case: "to discover exact paths for ae_setProperty / ae_setKeyframe," naming the alternative tools it feeds. It lacks an explicit exclusion (e.g. "don't use for reading a single value if you already know the path"), so it stops one step short of a 5.

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