setLayerExpression

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic mutating action ('set or remove') but does not mention side effects, permissions required, behavior on invalid inputs, or whether the expression replaces existing ones. The schema's note about empty string removing an expression is the only behavioral detail, but that is already in the schema.

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 efficiently conveys the core action without extraneous words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

The tool is relatively simple and the input schema is fully descriptive, but the description lacks usage context, behavior expectations, and guidance on error cases or side effects. Given no annotations and no output schema, a bit more context would be helpful, but the schema mitigates some of this. Overall, it is minimally complete but has clear gaps.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond schema, merely saying 'specific layer property' while the schema already details each parameter (compIndex, layerIndex, propertyName, expressionString) with clear explanations. No additional meaning is provided.

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 tool performs two related actions: setting or removing an expression on a layer property. It uses a specific verb (set/remove) and resource (expression for a layer property), which distinguishes it from siblings like setLayerKeyframe that handle keyframes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as setLayerKeyframe or apply-effect. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios that favor this tool over others.

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