add-any-effect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only describes the action without mentioning side effects, failure modes, prerequisites, or success indicators. This leaves significant transparency gaps.

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 14-word sentence that directly states the core function. It is front-loaded, concise, and every word contributes meaning.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens after adding the effect (return value, errors), how effectSettings are applied, or any constraints (e.g., valid layer types). For a tool with 4 parameters and flexible behavior, more context is needed.

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?

The schema provides 100% coverage for all parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds the clarification that display names are accepted (not just matchName), which is not explicit in the schema. However, this is a minor addition beyond the already-complete 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 clearly states the verb 'Add', the resource 'After Effects effect to a layer', and the specific method 'by matchName or display name'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like apply-effect or apply-effect-template by emphasizing its general applicability and the naming convention.

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 phrase 'any After Effects effect' implies a general-purpose use case, and the parameter hint about preferring matchName gives some context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like apply-effect, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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