render-aerender

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: runs in background, does not block UI, requires saved project, returns immediately unless waitMs is set, and defaults to saving the open project first. All important behavioral traits are covered.

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 concise, with no wasted sentences. It starts with the core purpose and key differentiator, then covers prerequisites, default behavior, and monitoring. Each sentence adds value.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers prerequisites, parameter behavior, return behavior, and how to monitor progress. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of parameters like saveFirst, waitMs, and projectPath, and how they interact. It also clarifies output path extension and template usage, going beyond the schema.

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 it renders a composition to a file in the background using aerender, distinguishing it from start-render by noting it does not freeze the UI. The verb 'render' and resource 'composition' are specific.

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 when to use this tool (background rendering without freezing UI) and provides a prerequisite (project must be saved). It also hints at using render-status to check progress. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives like start-render for specific cases.

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