set_expression

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits. There is no mention of side effects (e.g., replacing existing expressions), validation of the expression, permissions required, or whether the operation is reversible. The agent receives no useful behavioral context.

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 insufficiently informative. Under-specification for a tool with six parameters and no annotations means it does not 'earn its place' by providing necessary detail. Better to expand with structured guidance.

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 the tool's complexity (6 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It omits essential context about what constitutes a valid 'property', how to identify it, the role of composition and layer identifiers, and the expected behavior of setting an expression.

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 17% (only 'expression' has a description: 'JavaScript expression'). The tool description does not elaborate on any parameter's meaning or usage. Parameters like 'compId', 'compName', 'layerName', 'layerIndex', and 'property' remain unexplained, leaving the agent to guess their roles.

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 'Set an expression on a property' clearly states the verb and resource, but lacks specificity about which property (e.g., layer property, composition property) or context. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_expression' and 'remove_expression', but remains vague enough to cause 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'apply_expression_template', 'add_expression_control', or 'enable_expression'. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, 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.