add_text_layer

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says a text layer is added, but does not indicate defaults, behavior when no compId/compName is provided, or any side effects or required context.

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 redundant words or filler. It is appropriately sized for the level of detail it delivers.

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?

Despite having 9 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description provides only the bare mutation action and omits context such as how the composition is targeted, defaults for optional fields, and what the result of the operation is. Additional context is needed for the tool to be safely selected and invoked.

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 78%, so the schema already documents most parameters sufficiently. The description adds no further parameter meaning, but this is acceptable given the high schema coverage. A few properties like position and justification lack descriptions, but the description does not help compensate.

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 ('Add a text layer to a composition') with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling tool 'add_text_layer_advanced'.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_text_layer_advanced, add_solid_layer, or other layer-creation tools. The intended use is only vaguely implied by the description.

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