get_expression

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

The description omits behavioral details such as what happens when no expression exists, whether errors occur if the property is invalid, or what the return value looks like. With zero annotations, the description should disclose more behavior, but it provides only a bare statement.

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 it sacrifices necessary detail. It could be structured to front-load the core action and then add context, but currently it is too minimal for practical use.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what is returned, how to uniquely identify a property, or any side effects. An agent could not reliably invoke this tool correctly based solely on this description.

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 0%, yet the description does not mention any parameters or their purposes. Five parameters exist (compId, compName, property, layerName, layerIndex) with no explanation of how they identify the target property. This is a critical gap that leaves the agent guessing required inputs.

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: 'Get the expression from a property.' It uses a specific verb (get) and resource (expression), and distinguishes from sibling tools like set_expression or remove_expression. However, it does not clarify what constitutes a 'property' in this domain, which is a minor ambiguity.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_keyframes or debug_dump_layer. No context about prerequisites or exclusions is provided. The agent receives no information on how to decide between this and similar read operations.

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