set_lut

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action and lists parameters. It does not disclose behavioral traits like whether existing LUTs are replaced, side effects, or required permissions.

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 very concise: one sentence stating purpose followed by a structured parameter list. Every part adds value without redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers the tool's operation, though it lacks context on node graph behavior or prerequisites. Still, it is complete enough for a simple parameterized action.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds valuable context for parameters (e.g., '1-based node index', 'absolute path to LUT file', defaults). It explains the parameters beyond the schema's type/title, though some details (e.g., allowed formats for lut_path) are missing.

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 a LUT to a node in a clip's color node graph'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'set_cdl' by specifying LUT application.

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 gives a basic purpose but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., set_cdl) or provide context on prerequisites or conditions. No 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.