apply_expression_template

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention what the tool does concretely (e.g., replaces existing expressions, requires a selected layer, side effects on keyframes) and provides zero behavioral context beyond the tautological name.

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 not effectively structured. It does not front-load critical information beyond the name, and the brevity comes at the cost of clarity. Under-specification is not conciseness.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a single vague sentence, the description is completely inadequate for the agent to understand invocation, required context, or expected results. It fails to provide any meaningful context for a tool that clearly operates within a complex composition/layer system.

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 14% (only the 'params' field has a description). The tool description adds no parameter explanations—it does not clarify compId, compName, layerName, layerIndex, or the enum values for template. With low coverage, the description should compensate but fails entirely.

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-built expression template' which is a verb+resource, but it is vague and does not differentiate from sibling tools like set_expression or apply_effect_template. It lacks specificity about what the template applies to or how it integrates with the composition/layer context, making it barely adequate.

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 over alternatives such as set_expression, enable_expression, or apply_effect_template. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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