run-script

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly discloses the read-only nature, which is a key behavioral trait, but it does not detail what happens on execution, error behavior, or whether parameters affect safety.

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 concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the action and key constraint.

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?

The description is too sparse for a tool with no output schema and no annotations. It leaves unclear return values, how to discover available scripts, and any prerequisite conditions. The read-only qualifier helps but doesn't compensate for the lack of operational context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents 'script' and 'parameters'. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter formats, valid script names, or parameter passing rules, so it matches the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('run') and explicitly states the tool executes a 'read-only script' in After Effects, which distinguishes it from mutating tools like setLayerKeyframe or apply-effect. The read-only qualifier clarifies its scope.

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 implies usage for non-destructive script execution via the 'read-only' qualifier, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings like get-results or get-help, nor does it mention alternatives or exclusions.

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