Hide Layer

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

With only a title annotation, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the two key effects: entities become invisible but remain processed during regeneration. It does not explicitly mention reversibility or restrictions such as current-layer behavior, but the core state change is honestly and precisely described.

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, well-structured sentence with a behavior parenthetical. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool 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?

For a low-complexity tool with one required parameter, an output schema, and a precise behavior note, the description is nearly complete. The only missing context is edge-case behavior such as whether the current layer can be hidden or whether this setting persists through save/reopen, but these are minor for selecting and invoking the tool.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter, including 'Layer name to turn off'. The tool description adds no parameter-specific syntax or format details beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('turn off') and resource ('layer'), and the parenthetical 'still processed in regeneration' precisely distinguishes this from the sibling layer_freeze tool. An agent can tell exactly what operation it performs without opening the schema.

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 behavior note about regeneration provides an implied decision point (use hide when the layer must remain in regeneration, as opposed to freezing), but it never names layer_freeze, layer_show, or layer_isolate, nor states when not to use this tool. Guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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