ae_import_file

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the target project and supported file types, which is useful context. However, it does not mention side effects such as whether duplicate imports are handled, whether the project must be open, or if an unsupported type will cause an error.

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 with no filler. The core action, target, and file-type scope are all front-loaded and each word earns 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?

For a one-parameter import tool, the description covers the essential invocation context: supported file types and the target project. It lacks guidance on error cases, batching alternatives, or success/return behavior, but the low complexity keeps this from being a critical gap.

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%, and the single parameter file_path is already described as an 'Absolute path to the file to import'. The description adds supported file-type context but no new parameter-level detail, 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 ('Import'), a clear resource ('a file'), and states the supported file types (video, image, audio, AEP) as well as the target context ('current After Effects project'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like ae_batch_import, which suggests batch behavior.

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 implies when to use it: when a single file needs to be brought into the current project. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like ae_batch_import for multiple files, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions.

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