create_transition

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Create a transition effect layer' without disclosing behavioral details such as side effects, required properties, or how the layer interacts with compositions. This leaves the agent with insufficient understanding of the tool's behavior.

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 one-sentence description is concise but under-specified. It does not waste words, but it omits essential details about parameters and usage, making it less effective than a well-rounded concise description.

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 six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description only offers a single basic sentence. It does not explain what a transition effect layer is, what the parameters control, or how it fits into the broader workflow, making the description inadequate for complex usage.

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?

The description does not mention any of the six parameters (type, color, compId, easing, compName, duration) or their meanings. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter context, even though the schema provides enums for type and easing.

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 the resource 'transition effect layer', which gives a specific purpose. It distinguishes from siblings since no other transition tool exists, but lacks details about transition types or context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_solid_layer or apply_effect. There is no mention of prerequisites, suitable scenarios, or exclusions.

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