set_effects

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

The description implies a write operation but does not disclose whether effects are added to existing ones or overwritten. No information about required permissions, side effects, or return behavior. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short.

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 filler. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, though it could benefit from additional structure to clarify parameter relationships without becoming verbose.

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?

With 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain how parameters combine (e.g., can shadow and blur be set simultaneously) or what the expected outcome is, leaving the agent to infer from the schema alone.

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 100%, so the description adds limited value beyond the schema. It lists effect types but does not explain parameter interactions (e.g., whether 'preset' overrides other shadow parameters). The schema already provides details, so baseline 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 tool adds shadows, blur, or background blur effects. It uses a specific verb ('add') and identifies the resource ('effects'), distinguishing it from related sibling tools like 'remove_all_effects' or 'batch_remove_effects'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'apply_backdrop_blur' or 'create_shadow_system'. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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