delete_layer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it only says that the operation modifies the open project. It does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether deleting a group deletes its contents, or what permissions or project state are required.

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 two short sentences with no wasted phrasing. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by the most important behavioral 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but this is a destructive mutation with no annotations. The description is insufficiently complete about safety, irreversibility, group deletion semantics, and how to identify a valid UID.

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%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented uid parameter. It does identify that the argument is a UID and that it can refer to a layer or group, but it does not explain UID format or where to find valid UIDs.

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 and resource: delete a layer or group by UID. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling layer tools such as create_paint_layer, rename_layer, and list_layers, which do not delete layers.

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 the tool is used for deletion but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, how to obtain the UID, or whether deletion is reversible. It also does not mention prerequisites such as selecting or locating the target layer first.

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