Show Layer

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

With only a title annotation and no read-only/destructive hints, the description carries the disclosure burden. 'Turn on a layer' clearly describes the state change, but it does not mention error behavior for unknown layers, behavior on already-visible layers, or any permissions/side effects.

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?

One short sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, with zero filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 one-parameter, non-nested tool with a complete schema and an output schema, the description supplies the essential state-transition context ('previously turned off') needed to select it. It could add a brief note on already-on or frozen layers, but nothing critical is missing.

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 input schema already fully documents the single required 'name' parameter as 'Layer name to turn on' (100% coverage). The tool description adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so it stays at the schema-driven baseline.

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 on') and resource ('a layer'), and anchors the operation to the 'previously turned off' state, so an agent can tell it targets visibility rather than freeze/lock state. It does not explicitly name a sibling for contrast, so it misses the top score.

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?

It implies the right condition for invocation: use when a layer is currently off. However, it gives no explicit guidance about related layer tools (e.g., layer_thaw or layer_hide), no when-not-to-use conditions, and no alternatives.

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