set_auto_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful behavioral fact: 'All spacing is 8px grid-snapped.' However, it does not explain side effects, whether non-frame nodes are rejected, whether omitted parameters reset existing values, or what happens when values are not multiples of 8.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by a useful constraint. There is no redundant repetition of schema information or filler content.

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 tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, two sentences are insufficient. It lacks defaults, enum guidance, frame-type prerequisites, and any explanation of how the layout configuration interacts with existing frame settings or the sibling set_layout_sizing tool.

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 67%, so the schema already documents many parameters. The description adds meaningful context for spacing parameters by stating the 8px grid-snapping rule, which is not present in the schema, but it does not clarify the enum semantics or the distinction between the various padding fields beyond what their names imply.

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 clear verb-and-resource structure: 'Configure auto-layout on a frame.' It is specific enough to identify the tool's purpose and distinguish it from generic layout or sizing tools, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with related siblings like set_layout_sizing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_layout_sizing, set_constraints, or resize_node. The only contextual hint is 'on a frame', but no exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions are provided, leaving selection primarily to inference.

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