add_layer

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It mentions adding a layer but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the action is reversible, required permissions, or behavior with invalid group names). Transparency is adequate for a simple operation but could be improved.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. The Args list is clear, though the enumeration of blend modes adds length. No unnecessary 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's main function and parameters but lacks information about return values, error conditions, or side effects. Adequate for a simple tool but not fully comprehensive.

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 0%, and the description explains 5 of 6 parameters (name, group, opacity, blend_mode, visible) with meaningful details. However, the required parameter 'filename' is not mentioned in the description, leaving a significant gap.

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 (add), the resource (empty normal layer), and the location (on top of the stack). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_group_layer and remove_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 adding a layer but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., add_group_layer). No guidance on prerequisites or context is provided.

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