create_lower_third

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

With no annotations, the description bears the burden of disclosure. It only mentions 'with animated text', hinting at animation but not revealing side effects, composition/layer creation, or output. It does not explain whether the tool modifies the project or creates new items, nor does it discuss any destructive or non-destructive aspects.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words, front-loading the core purpose. However, it is under-specified for the tool's complexity, so the conciseness is not paired with adequate structure or additional sections that would help the agent.

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?

The tool has 13 parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and nested object parameters, making it a highly complex tool. The description provides almost no contextual information about defaults, parameter interactions, or the internal behavior, rendering it completely inadequate for an agent to use correctly.

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 only 31% (only 4 of 13 parameters have descriptions). The description adds no parameter information whatsoever, failing to compensate for the low coverage. It doesn't even connect 'animated text' to the animateIn/animateOut fields, leaving most parameters semantically opaque.

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 verb 'Create' and a specific resource 'lower third graphic', and adds 'with animated text' which further differentiates it from siblings like create_title_card or create_transition. The purpose is unambiguous and distinguishes the tool's specific function.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus related creation tools such as create_title_card, create_logo_reveal, or create_text_animator. It lacks any context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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