apply-preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'apply', omitting details such as whether the preset overwrites existing effects, side effects on the layer, required permissions, or error handling for invalid preset paths. This is insufficient 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?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It contains no superfluous words or tangential information, making it highly concise and efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (applying a preset file), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks information about return values (likely void), success indicators, or behavioral details that would help an agent understand the outcome. With no output schema, the description should be more 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 the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'to a layer', which is already implied by the 'layerIndex' parameter. Therefore, the baseline score of 3 applies, as the description provides minimal added value.

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 clearly states the action (apply), the resource (After Effects .ffx preset file), and the target (layer). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'apply-effect' (which applies an effect directly, not a preset file) and 'apply-effect-template' (different format).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., layer must be compatible), when not to use, or suggestions for related tools like 'list-presets' or 'search-presets' to find preset paths.

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