Select layers

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

The annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the safety bar is lower. The description's one added fact, that the existing selection is replaced rather than extended, is genuinely useful and consistent with the annotations, but nothing is said about invalid layer ids, empty/scene-missing cases, or the effect on existing selection state.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the mutated state ('current selection') and the input ('given layers') stated immediately; nothing is wasted or buried.

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 one-parameter state-mutation tool with a fully documented schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers the essential replace semantics. Minor gaps remain around invalid-id handling and scene preconditions, but no output schema is needed here.

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 100% and the single 'layerIds' parameter is already documented in the schema as 'One or more Cavalry layer ids.' The description adds no format, id-source, or ordering detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (select/replace) and resource (selection of layers) with the scope qualifier 'replace the current selection.' An agent can distinguish it from the read-oriented cavalry_get_selection by the replace semantics, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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, no prerequisites (e.g., a scene must be open), and no mention of alternatives such as cavalry_get_selection for reading the current selection or cavalry_list_layers for discovering valid ids.

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