ae_selectLayers

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false / destructiveHint=false / openWorldHint=false; the description adds the meaningful behavioral fact that other layers get deselected, which the agent cannot infer from annotations or schema. It stays silent on failure modes (unknown layer name, no active comp) and on whether selection state persists across commands.

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 with zero filler; the action is front-loaded and the prerequisite dependency is attached as a compact parenthetical. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

Given three documented params and no output schema, the essentials are covered, but a state-mutating prerequisite tool would benefit from noting failure behavior, whether the comp must be active, and what the agent should do next after selection. The description is adequate rather than complete.

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 100%, so all three parameters ('layers' accepting names or 1-based indexes, 'properties' applying to the first layer, 'compositionName' defaulting to the active comp) are documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about parameter behavior, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('select layers') plus the scope qualifier '(and deselect others)', and names the downstream tool it exists for (ae_executeCommand). An agent can tell immediately this mutates the AE selection rather than reading layer data like ae_getLayer.

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 says it is 'needed before menu commands that act on the selection' and points to ae_executeCommand, giving a clear precondition for use. It does not state when the tool is unnecessary or what to do if no comp is open, so it falls short of a full when/when-not/alternative matrix.

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