render-composition

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important side effects: 'AE is busy until rendering finishes' and the necessity of polling after a pending response. This is good but could go further (e.g., how the return looks, error conditions).

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 two sentences, directly states the core purpose, and front-loads the key action. No fluff or redundant detail; it is concise and well-organized.

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?

While the description mentions the asynchronous behavior and the need to poll, it omits essential context such as parameter meanings, expected outcomes, or how to handle failure. Given the lack of output schema and parameter descriptions, this is insufficient for a confident invocation.

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?

The input schema has zero parameter descriptions, and the description does not explain any of the five parameters (compId, overwrite, outputPath, outputTemplate, renderTemplate). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema coverage, leaving the agent guessing about parameter meanings.

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 ('Render a composition'), the target ('in the running AE application'), and a specific behavior ('preserving other queue selections'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like render-project, which likely targets the whole project.

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 a post-call instruction ('Poll get-request after a pending response') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like render-project or get-render. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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