Open Layout View

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds useful context with the aprx_path=CURRENT restriction and focus behavior. It does not disclose side effects such as what close_other_views does, so a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with the action ('open and focus') followed by the key constraint. No redundant or wasted wording.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. But with 0% parameter schema coverage, the description should explain layout_name and close_other_views; it omits both, leaving an agent without guidance for two of three parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It clarifies only aprx_path (must be CURRENT) and leaves layout_name and close_other_views unexplained, including where layout_name comes from and what close_other_views changes.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: opening and focusing a layout view in the current ArcGIS Pro window. Distinguishes from siblings by resource (layout vs map/report) and adds the aprx_path=CURRENT scope constraint. Does not explicitly name alternatives like open_map_view, so not a 5.

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 constraint '仅支持 aprx_path=CURRENT' gives one clear usage condition. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus list_layouts, open_map_view, or other view-opening tools. Usage is only implied.

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