setLayerExpression

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does indicate the dual set/remove capability, but it omits important details such as whether setting overwrites existing expressions, what happens if the property does not exist, or any error/permission requirements. This is a meaningful gap for a mutation tool.

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 that front-loads the core action and object. Every word is purposeful, with no filler or redundancy. It is highly concise while still conveying the essential purpose.

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?

Despite having 4 parameters and no output schema, the description provides only a minimal statement of purpose. It does not explain overwrite behavior, error conditions, or how this tool fits into a typical workflow. The schema covers parameter specifics, but the description leaves significant operational ambiguity for an agent.

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%, and the parameter descriptions already explain the meaning of each field, including the empty-string removal behavior for expressionString. The tool description adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Set or remove' and the resource 'expression for a specific layer property', accurately capturing the tool's function. It is distinct from sibling tools like setLayerKeyframe (keyframes) and apply-effect (effects), leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 setting or removing expressions on layer properties, but it does not explicitly distinguish when to choose this tool over alternatives like setLayerKeyframe or apply-effect. There is no explicit 'when to use' or exclusion guidance, only the implied context from the tool's name and description.

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