Set Current Layout

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Activate' implies a state change but does not clarify whether this switches between Model and paper space, affects subsequent commands, or is non-destructive. This is thin for a tool that changes the active drawing context.

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 four-word sentence that is entirely meaningful and front-loaded. There is no wasted text 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 tool with a fully documented schema and an output schema present, the description covers the core invocation semantics. However, it omits useful context such as requiring an existing layout tab, how to discover valid names, and the effect of switching the active layout on later operations.

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 100%, with the parameter name and description already explaining that it accepts 'Model' or a paper-space layout name. The tool description adds no parameter-level information, but the schema is sufficient, so baseline 3 applies.

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 'Activate a layout tab' states a specific action and resource, clearly matching the tool name and title. It is distinguishable from layer_set_current and layout_create/layout_delete because it concerns activating an existing layout tab, though it does not explicitly reference sibling tools.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as layout_list to discover layout names, layout_create if the layout does not exist, or viewport_set_scale for paper-space adjustments. No exclusions or contextual triggers are mentioned.

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