ae_setMotionBlur

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

Annotations already declare it is a non-read-only, non-destructive, closed-world mutation. The description usefully adds that the composition switch is also affected, not just layers, which is genuine behavioral context. It does not say whether the call is idempotent, what the return looks like, or how samples/shutter settings interact with enabling.

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 with no filler, which is good, but it is compressed to the point of telegraphic ambiguity — the semicolon-separated parameter list reads like a keyword dump rather than an explanation.

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 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations beyond the safety hints, key questions stay unanswered: what happens when 'layers' is omitted, does 'enabled' apply to both layers and the comp switch, and what defaults apply to samples and shutter settings.

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 only 33%: layers and compositionName are documented, but enabled, samples, shutterAngle and shutterPhase are not. The description merely echoes the parameter names ('shutterAngle/phase/samples') without units, defaults, ranges, or effect on render cost, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb ('toggle') plus resource ('motion blur on layers ... and the comp switch'), so an agent knows this affects motion blur rather than arbitrary layer switches. It is distinguishable from ae_setLayerSwitches and ae_setProperty, though the parenthetical '(or all)' and 'comp switch' packing make the exact scope slightly dense.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus ae_setLayerSwitches or ae_setProperty, which plausibly also touch motion blur. The only hint is 'layers (or all)', which implies omitting layers targets everything, but that must be inferred rather than read.

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