mcp_aftereffects_get_effects_help

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only says 'Get help' but does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., text, list, static content), whether it is read-only, or any side effects. Minimal information is given.

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, very concise. However, it is overly terse and could include more useful information without losing conciseness. It fails to earn its place by adding minimal value beyond the name.

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 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should at minimum specify the type of output (e.g., text help, list of effects). It does not, leaving the agent uninformed about what to expect.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, but it could clarify that no input is required. A score of 4 reflects adequate coverage given the absence of parameters.

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 the tool provides help on After Effects effects, which is clear in purpose but vague in scope. It does not specify what kind of help (e.g., list, documentation, interactive), and the sibling 'get-help' could overlap. A more specific verb or resource would improve clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get-help' or 'apply-effect'. The description lacks context for decision-making.

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