fusion_get_comp_settings_tool

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as side effects (none expected for a read operation), error conditions (e.g., what if comp is not open?), or output format. The description only lists what is returned.

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, which is concise but lacks detail. It could be front-loaded with key information, but it is not verbose. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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?

With zero parameters and no output schema, the description is the sole source of information. It lists five categories of settings but does not describe the return format (e.g., object, JSON), nesting, or example output. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand what will be returned.

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?

No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. However, the description does not elaborate on the structure or contents of the returned settings beyond listing categories, leaving some ambiguity about what exactly is included in 'format settings' or 'path'.

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?

Clearly states it returns composition settings including timeline, render, frame, path, and format. The verb 'Return' is appropriate, and the resource is composition settings. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that return single settings (e.g., fusion_get_comp_path_tool).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like the individual getter tools. The description does not mention that this is a bulk retrieval tool or that it should be used instead of multiple calls.

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