layer_setOpacity

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as whether a keyframe is created/modified, interactions with existing keyframes, interpolation, or undo behavior. The value range is more parameter semantics than behavioral transparency.

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 one clear sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and includes the crucial value range. Every word earns its place; no fluff or redundancy.

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 schema covers parameter semantics thoroughly, there are no annotations and no output schema. The description does not explain the operation's effect on animation, whether it creates keyframes, or any side effects. This leaves the tool under-described for an agent to use it correctly in an animation 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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter already described in the input schema. The description repeats the opacity range (0.0 to 1.0), adding minimal value beyond what the schema provides. 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 action (set) and resource (opacity of a layer) with a specific context (at a specific frame), including the valid value range. It distinguishes from siblings like layer_setVisibility and layer_setTransform by focusing on opacity/transparency.

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 purpose is clear enough to imply when to use it (when you need to animate opacity at a frame). The frame specificity hints at keyframing, providing context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, so it doesn't earn a 5.

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