save_layout

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'permanently' but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting existing layout), required device state, or failure modes. Lacks behavioral detail.

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?

Description is concise with two clear sentences plus argument doc. Efficiently communicates core action, though the argument section slightly overlaps with schema. Well front-loaded.

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?

Output schema exists but description omits return value. Tool is a mutation with no discussion of success/error indicators, prerequisites like device connection, or how permanence is handled. Given complexity and sibling count, more context needed.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description adds meaning by stating 'Complete layout JSON string' and 'Must be valid LayoutConfig', which clarifies expected format and constraints beyond the bare schema.

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 'Push a layout and tell the device to save it to disk permanently' clearly states the verb (push and save) and resource (layout to device), and distinguishes from siblings like push_layout (which may not save permanently) and save_device_layout (which may save existing layout).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like push_layout, save_buffer, or save_device_layout. The description does not specify prerequisites or context for use.

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