batch-set-layer-properties

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key side effect—'Setting position clears its existing keyframes first'—and enumerates the properties affected, which is useful transparency for a mutation tool. It does not mention other potential side effects like whether other property sets clear keyframes, but this is a minor gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. It summarizes what the tool does, how operations are targeted, and an important side effect without 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?

For a batch property-setting tool with no output schema, the description covers the main functionality, property options, and a notable side effect. It does not mention return values or error behavior, but these are less critical and the schema fills in comp selection and property formats.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters, including the operations array structure and property details. The description adds context about keyframe clearing and the batch nature, but the schema already explains the parameter meanings well, 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 begins with a specific verb-resource pair ('Set transform/visibility properties on MANY layers') and clearly distinguishes this batch operation from singular tools like setLayerKeyframe. The scope ('MANY layers') and property list are explicit.

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 description clearly implies a batch use case ('on MANY layers in one call') and lists the properties that can be set, which differentiates from single-layer alternatives. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for single-layer operations.

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