add-any-effect

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and identification method, but does not mention side effects (e.g., replacing existing effects), permissions, error behavior, or what happens after addition. 'Add' implies mutation, but other behavioral traits remain opaque.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and free of fluff. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and method without unnecessary words, earning its place.

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?

Despite a rich schema, the tool lacks an output schema and annotations. The description does not clarify return values, prerequisites (e.g., valid comp/layer indices), or behavior in error cases. For a mutation tool in a complex environment, this minimal description is incomplete.

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%, and each parameter has a detailed description (e.g., effect, compIndex, layerIndex, effectSettings). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 states a clear action: 'Add any After Effects effect to a layer' with a specific method ('by matchName or display name'). It distinguishes from template/preset-adders by emphasizing 'any' effect, but does not differentiate from the sibling 'apply-effect' tool, making the purpose clear but not fully sibling-distinct.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'apply-effect', 'apply-effect-template', or 'apply-preset'. The description gives no context or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction on tool selection.

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