render-queue

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 explicitly mentions destructive actions ('clear the whole queue', 'remove a single item by index'), which is good, and notes that list returns 'status and output path'. However, it does not disclose whether clear is irreversible, whether permissions are needed, or how the 'remove' action behaves with an invalid index. This is adequate but not rich.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose ('Inspect or manage') then efficiently enumerates the specific actions and their targets. Every word adds value; no repetition of parameter names or schema details.

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 multi-action tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is quite complete: it covers all three actions and hints at return data for list. It lacks details on error handling or edge cases (e.g., invalid index), but given the tool's moderate complexity and the clear param descriptions, this is sufficient. The presence of sibling tools like render-status further reduces the need for extensive explanation.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful context beyond the schema: it ties 'index' to the remove action ('remove a single item by index') and clarifies the list output ('status and output path'). This reinforces and extends the parameter semantics already provided in the input 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?

The description uses a specific verb phrase 'Inspect or manage' with a clear resource 'After Effects render queue' and enumerates specific actions (list, clear, remove). It distinguishes from sibling tools like render-status and start-render by focusing on queue inspection and mutation rather than status or rendering execution.

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 conveys usage context by listing the three actions available ('list', 'clear', 'remove') and their effects, implying when to use this tool versus render-status or start-render. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when-not-to-use, but the action-based guidance is clear enough for an agent to select this tool for queue management tasks.

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