duplicate_layer

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full burden. It states that the new layer includes the source layer's cels and is placed on top, which is helpful. However, it does not disclose whether other properties (e.g., blend mode, opacity, visibility) are duplicated, nor any side effects.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the primary action and scope.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description does not mention what the tool returns, nor does it clarify parameter semantics. Given the absence of output schema, this omission leaves the agent uncertain about the outcome (e.g., returns the new layer name?).

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 0%, yet the description adds no explanation of the parameters ('layer' and 'filename'). The purpose of 'filename' is particularly unclear – it might refer to the sprite file or target filename. The description should have clarified these for effective use.

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 verb 'Duplicate' and the resource 'layer', and specifies that it includes cels and places the new layer on top. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like copy_cel (duplicates cel only) or add_layer (creates empty 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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., copy_cel+add_layer, duplicate_frame). No exclusions or context about prerequisites are given, so the agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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