create-camera

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the creation action and selection method, but fails to disclose side effects (e.g., whether it modifies the active comp), error handling (e.g., if compName doesn't exist), or system impacts. Essential behavioral traits are missing.

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 with a clarifying clause, making it concise and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words, but could benefit from slightly more structure (e.g., separating selection options from creation act).

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 7 parameters and no output schema, the description should at least hint at return values (e.g., the created camera layer). It also lacks behavioral completeness (e.g., default positions, interaction with existing layers). The description is adequate for a simple creation tool but not fully 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 coverage is 100%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining the composition selection logic (compName/compIndex/active comp fallback), which is not fully captured in the schema. However, other parameters like 'zoom' or 'position' remain schema-dependent without extra context.

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 ('Create a camera layer') and the resource ('in a composition'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create-adjustment-layer' or 'create-text-layer', making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explains how to select the composition (by compName, compIndex, or active comp), providing clear context. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or alternatives for similar tasks (e.g., using 'create-adjustment-layer' for other layer types).

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