layout_set_position

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It says positions are set, but does not mention coordinate units, whether existing positions are overwritten, side effects on connected layout, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 front-loaded with the verb and object. It wastes no words)Skip, though it embeds parameter documentation inline instead of relying on the schema.

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 mutating layout tool, the description lacks essential context: coordinate format/units, how node paths are resolved, return behavior, and side effects. The agent knows what to change but not enough to reliably construct valid arguments.

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 JSON schema provides no property descriptions and the items type is empty, so the description's 'nodes (list[typing.Any]): [{path, x, y}, ...]' is the only meaningful specification. It gives the required object shape, though it leaves path, x, and y semantics vague.

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 action (

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 is given about when to use this tool versus siblings such as layout_align, or about prerequisites like node existence. The description only states what it does, not how an agent should decide to invoke it.

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