get_tilemap_info

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

With no annotations, the description reveals it is a read operation (returns JSON) but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or handle error cases like missing layers. The detail about excluding empty tile 0 adds value, but overall behavioral traits are minimally disclosed.

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 very concise: a single opening sentence followed by clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description specifies the returned JSON fields, which compensates for the lack of output schema. However, it does not mention error handling, prerequisites (e.g., file must contain a tilemap layer), or behavior when the given layer is not a tilemap, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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%, so the description compensates by briefly explaining both parameters. 'filename: Aseprite file to read' and 'layer_name: Tilemap layer to inspect' add meaning but are still somewhat minimal. No additional constraints or formats are provided.

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 it retrieves tilemap layer info including tile size, tile count, and map dimensions. It distinguishes itself from sibling get_ tools by focusing specifically on tilemap 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 usage for inspecting tilemap metadata but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives nor when not to use it. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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