set_effect_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a mutation but does not disclose permission requirements, whether the effect/property must already exist, whether changes are undoable, or what happens on invalid input.

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 with no wasted words. Its brevity is appropriate for the core purpose, though it leaves behavioral gaps that are scored elsewhere.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain prerequisites, failure modes, or effects of the operation, leaving the agent with limited context beyond 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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all six parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 clear verb ('Set') and resource ('property value on an effect applied to a clip'), making the operation understandable. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_effect_property or set_effect_enabled, so it falls short of a 5.

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 implies when the tool might be used, but gives no explicit guidance on when to choose it over get_effect_property, set_effect_enabled, or other effect-related tools. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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