duplicate_layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that duplication includes content frames and property tracks, which gives good insight into scope. However, it does not explain the resulting layer placement, naming convention, or potential side effects on selection or other layers.

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?

Single sentence, no unnecessary words, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word contributes value.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. However, it could mention return value or success indication, and any error conditions (e.g., invalid layerId). Still, it is largely complete given the tool's simplicity.

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%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds context about what duplication includes, but this is more about tool behavior than parameter semantics. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'duplicate' and resource 'a layer', and specifies 'with all its content frames and property tracks', which distinguishes it from siblings like 'duplicate_frame' (duplicates only a frame) and 'add_layer' (creates a new empty layer).

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 implies usage for copying a layer entirely, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., duplicate_frame) or provide prerequisites (e.g., layer must exist). No guidance on when not to use it.

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