inspect_usd_layer

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'NO_UNDO' and 'apply_response_cap', which are behavioral hints, but they are cryptic and unexplained. It does not state whether the tool is read-only or mutating, or what side effects might occur.

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 very short and could be considered concise, but it is under-specified. It is not front-loaded with a clear purpose; instead, it leads with a noun phrase and a parenthetical tag, which makes it harder to parse than a well-structured sentence.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and a 0% schema coverage, the description is the only source of context. It fails to describe return values, parameter usage, or operational effects. Given the tool's complexity, this is completely inadequate.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (ctx, node_path, max_layers). The phrase 'layer custom metadata / sublayer path' is the only hint, but it is not explicitly tied to the parameter names or required values.

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 is a fragment: 'layer 自定义元数据 / sublayer 路径' (layer custom metadata / sublayer path) with no clear verb like 'inspect' or 'get'. It hints at what the tool touches but does not state an action or resource clearly. As a result, it only weakly distinguishes itself from 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as lop_layer_info or get_usd_composition. The description gives no context for selecting it or any exclusions.

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