ae_add_camera

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it only restates the core action. It does not disclose side effects such as where the camera layer is placed in the layer stack, how it interacts with existing 3D layers or cameras, or what happens if a camera already exists.

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 eight-word sentence with no filler, leading with the verb and clearly stating the object and target. It is concise without being bloated, and any lack of detail is a completeness concern, not a structure concern.

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 simple mutation with only one required parameter and full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate for invoking the tool. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it still leaves prerequisites, return/confirmation behavior, and side-effect context unstated.

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%: comp_name, camera_name, and preset all have descriptions, and preset also has an explicit enum and default. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('a camera layer to a composition'), making the core action unmistakable. Among sibling layer-creation tools like ae_add_text_layer, ae_add_solid_layer, ae_add_null_layer, and ae_add_light, it uniquely and clearly identifies what is created.

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 sibling tools, nor does it state prerequisites such as whether the target composition must already exist or be open. Agents must infer usage entirely from the tool name and schema.

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