Preview After Effects Render

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: no Adobe contact, no queueing, no rendering, confirming this is a pure dry-run against provided paths.

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, zero filler. The positive scope statement comes first and the negative capability statement second, which is exactly the right front-loading for a preview tool.

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 an output schema present, the description need not describe return values, and the 100% schema coverage handles parameters. What remains is sufficient for a read-only preview, though it does not explain why a preview would fail or what it validates against.

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 all five required parameters are fully documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description reinforces the composition and workspace-directory constraints but adds no format, syntax, or validation detail beyond the schema.

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 (Preview) and resource (a bounded queue-only After Effects render request) with scope narrowed to one named composition and an existing workspace output directory. It is clearly distinguishable from enqueue_after_effects_render, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 negation 'does not contact Adobe, enqueue, or render' implicitly tells the agent this is a validation-only step before a real enqueue, which is useful directional guidance. However, no alternative tool is named and no explicit when-to-use condition or precondition is stated.

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