Isolate Layer

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

The description clearly discloses the side effect that all other layers will be hidden, which is important behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It does not mention whether the previous visibility state can be restored, but the core mutating behavior is 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 a single, tight sentence that communicates the tool's entire behavior with no filler. Key information is front-loaded and the parenthetical 'layer isolation' reinforces the conceptual name without adding bulk.

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 single-parameter mutating tool with 100% schema coverage and an output schema present, the description is largely complete. It fully specifies the operation's effect. The only minor gap is not explaining how to undo the isolation, but this does not prevent correct invocation.

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 parameter description already states that the named layer stays visible while all others are hidden. The tool description adds no new parameter-level detail, so the baseline score 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 ('hide') and resource ('all layers'), with a precise exception ('except the specified one'). This clearly distinguishes layer_isolate from sibling tools like layer_hide and layer_show by describing a unique all-except-one behavior.

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 intended use case is implied by the description: use this when you want to focus on a single layer and hide everything else. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over layer_hide/layer_show, nor does it mention any prerequisites or restoration behavior.

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