Apply Effect Recipe

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it applies to the active layer, combines multiple styles, and offers mood-based auto-selection. It doesn't detail whether existing styles are overwritten, but overall is fairly transparent given annotations.

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 two concise sentences: first states the core action, second explains the two usage modes. No wasted words, front-loaded with verb and resource.

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 tool with no output schema and 5 optional parameters, the description covers the primary behavior and parameter relationships. It could mention return value or effect on existing layer styles, but overall is adequate given the tool's simplicity and annotations.

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% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds value by explaining the relationship between 'recipe' and 'mood' (choose by name or mood for auto-match), and implies that intensity, color, and angle are overrides. This clarifies usage 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 the tool applies a pre-built visual effect recipe to the active layer, with options to choose by name or automatically match a mood. It distinguishes from siblings like ps_apply_filter (single filter) by noting recipes combine multiple styles for polished results.

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 usage via 'polished results in one call' and 'active layer', but does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., ps_set_layer_style for manual adjustments). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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