rhino_layer_create

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, consistent with a write operation. However, the description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond creation, such as what happens if the layer name already exists, whether the operation is reversible, or any authentication/authorization requirements. The description adds minimal context beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentence. It could be slightly more informative (e.g., mention returned object), but it is well-structured and efficient, earning a 4.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the basic action. However, it omits important context such as error handling (e.g., duplicate layer name), the return value (though an output schema exists), and how it interacts with other layer tools. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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 provides detailed descriptions for each parameter (e.g., name uniqueness, doc_id default). The tool description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides, only re-stating that colour and visibility are optional. With adequate schema coverage, a score of 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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('layer'), and mentions optional attributes (colour, visibility). It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling layer operations like rhino_layer_delete or rhino_layer_set_color.

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 the tool is used for creating layers with optional colour/visibility, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., modifying existing layers), nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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