filter_apply

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates the operation is non-destructive (creates a DrawableFilter), which is valuable behavioral context. However, it omits permission requirements, whether the filter is applied immediately or requires a render step, and effects on the layer's state.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and the key non-destructive attribute. Efficient and no wasted words.

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?

For a 5-parameter mutation tool with nested objects and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It references discovery but doesn't detail parameter usage or expected outcomes, and an output schema exists but the description doesn't leverage it to clarify return behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate for all parameter semantics, but it only hints at the 'operation' and 'parameters' fields indirectly. It doesn't explain 'session_id', 'layer_id', 'name', or the expected structure of the 'parameters' object, leaving critical parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb (Apply) and resource (GEGL operation as a non-destructive GIMP DrawableFilter) on a specified target (a layer). This distinguishes it from filter_list and filter_describe, which are read-only discovery tools, and from structural tools like layer_delete.

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 phrase 'Discover parameters first if uncertain' implies a workflow involving filter_describe, but it doesn't explicitly say to use filter_list/filter_describe as the alternative. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites (like session/layer existence) are stated.

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