ae_set3D

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation. The description adds useful context about what is changed (3D/2D state, z depth, material options) but does not cover reversibility, permission needs, or how material options interact with 3D mode.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence that names the application, action, optional depth behavior, and material options. It is dense but efficient, with no wasted preamble.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with annotations and no output schema, the description gives enough context to understand the core effect. It is slightly incomplete about composition targeting and parameter interactions, but those gaps are partly covered by the schema.

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 low at 43%, so the description must compensate. It does so reasonably by naming the material parameters and explaining that threeD toggles between 3D and 2D, while z is linked to depth/parallax; the schema already documents z, layers, and compositionName.

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 states a specific verb and resource: making After Effects layers 3D or 2D, setting z depth, and setting material options. It is clear about what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as ae_setTransform or ae_setLayerSwitches.

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?

Usage is implied by the capability description: use it to toggle 3D mode and set related depth/material properties. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus ae_setTransform or ae_setLayerSwitches, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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