ae_exec

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the runtime environment (ES3), constraints on JavaScript features, and the return serialization behavior. It does not cover error handling or side effects, but is otherwise transparent.

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 well-structured with bullet points for constraints and an example, making it easy to parse. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value, and the format aids readability.

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?

Given the complexity of a code execution tool and only one parameter, the description is fairly complete. It covers the execution environment, constraints, return format, and provides an example. Missing details about error handling or response format do not significantly hinder understanding.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it explains the parameter 'code' is ExtendScript/ES3, describes constraints, and gives an example. This adds value beyond the schema's simple string type.

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 executes arbitrary ExtendScript in After Effects, with a specific verb ('Execute') and resource ('ExtendScript inside After Effects'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by comparing to similar tools and providing constraints and an example.

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 clear context for usage, including the ES3 engine and constraints, but does not explicitly compare to siblings ae_health or ae_scene_info. However, the nature of the tool (code execution) is distinct enough that guidelines are implied.

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