apply_effect_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the action as 'apply' but does not explain whether it adds, replaces, or modifies effects on a layer, whether it is destructive, or what side effects occur. The one-sentence description is insufficient for understanding 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?

While the description is brief (one sentence), it is under-specified. Conciseness should balance brevity with informativeness; here, essential information is missing, making it too short to be helpful.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description does not cover expected return values, required context (e.g., existing composition/layer), or how the template interacts with layer effects. The tool is not adequately described 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 coverage is only 29% (just intensity and customParams have descriptions). The description adds no parameter explanations beyond the schema. Critical parameters like compId, compName, layerName, layerIndex, and template are left undocumented. The description fails to compensate for the low coverage.

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 states 'Apply a pre-configured effect template' which specifies the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'apply_effect' which also applies effects, nor does it clarify what distinguishes a 'template' from a direct effect. The purpose is adequately clear but lacks specificity.

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternative effect tools (e.g., apply_effect, modify_effect_properties). There are no prerequisites or context requirements mentioned, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate scenario for invocation.

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