effect_applyDropShadow

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says nothing about whether the effect replaces existing effects, whether it is undoable, whether it applies to a single item or all selected items, or how document_id resolves when omitted.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste, so it is not verbose. But it is under-specified rather than concise: every sentence "earns its place" only because there is just one and it conveys minimal information.

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?

For a 9-parameter mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and near-zero schema documentation, the description is far too thin. An agent gets no indication of permissions, reversibility, or how the required pageIndex/itemIndex pair identifies the target object.

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 only 11% – just document_id is documented. The description adds nothing about the eight other parameters (blur, mode, angle, color, opacity, distance, itemIndex, pageIndex); only defaults and numeric ranges in the schema hint at their meaning, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Apply a drop shadow effect to an object"), which is unambiguous and clearly separable from siblings like effect_applyFeather and effect_applyTransparency. It does not, however, explicitly name those alternatives or clarify what kind of object is targeted.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this effect versus effect_applyFeather, effect_applyTransparency, or effect_applyGradientFeather, nor any prerequisites (e.g. that the item must be a page item on the given page). The agent is left to infer all routing from the name alone.

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