ae_set_output_module

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It discloses the intent ('Configure the output module') but does not mention that this is a mutating operation, whether existing output settings are overwritten, whether the template must already exist, or any side effects on the render queue item.

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, well-formed sentence with no filler. The core action and target resource are front-loaded, and the parenthetical adds useful scope without bloating the text.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits prerequisites (valid queue_index, existing render queue item), the need to use a template name from ae_list_output_templates, and what happens to unsupplied settings. An agent would need to infer important workflow context.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds a small amount of context by linking the tool's purpose to output-path and format/codec behavior, but it does not meaningfully enrich parameter semantics beyond the 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 states a specific action ('Configure the output module') and a specific resource ('a render queue item'), with a parenthetical that adds the relevant fields ('format, codec, output path'). It is clear and not a tautology, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like ae_set_render_settings.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no preconditions, and no exclusions. It does not mention that a render queue item must already exist or that template choices should come from ae_list_output_templates. The usage context is only implicit.

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