move_layer

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the mutation and closed-world nature are known. The description adds useful context about the 1-based indexing and parent-group restriction, but does not cover side effects, error conditions, or required permissions.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words, and the key behavioral detail (index base) is front-loaded before the parent-group note.

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 simple mutation with annotations covering safety, the description gives enough to understand the core operation, but it omits parameter semantics for filename and layer, and does not describe what happens on invalid indices or missing layers.

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% for all three required parameters. The description explains the meaning of to_index (1-based, bottom-most) but leaves filename and layer entirely undocumented, so it only partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions.

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 states a specific verb ('Reorder') and resource ('a layer') and clarifies the target index convention. It is clearly distinct from most siblings, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from related ordering tools like set_cel_z_index or move_frame.

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 note that the move occurs within the layer's current parent group provides a usage constraint, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as set_cel_z_index or set_layer_properties.

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