Arranges Substance Designer graph nodes into left-to-right columns with configurable spacing when the API provides no layout. Run it before adding frames or comments, which it leaves in place.
Ordena los nodos en columnas de izquierda a derecha. Es un layout propio: la API no ofrece uno.
No mueve frames ni comentarios, asi que usalo antes de crear los frames.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| graph | No | ||
| package | No | ||
| spacing_x | No | ||
| spacing_y | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses what the operation does NOT touch (frames and comments) and that it is a custom, non-API layout, but it says nothing about mutation semantics, permissions, idempotency, or what happens to nodes outside the target area.
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, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed immediately by the constraint on ordering. No filler, though the layout could be tightened and parameter defaults are not addressed.
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 state-mutating layout tool with four undocumented, optional parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description says too little. An agent cannot tell whether omitting graph/package applies the layout to the current graph, nor how spacing values are interpreted.
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 four undocumented parameters (graph, package, spacing_x, spacing_y). It never mentions any of them or explains what null/default means, leaving only the faint implication that column layout involves spacing.
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 concrete verb and resource: it orders nodes into left-to-right columns, and explicitly notes it is a custom layout the API does not provide. It also hints at scope by saying it does not move frames or comments, though it never names a sibling tool it competes with.
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?
Gives an explicit ordering instruction: run it before creating frames, since it will not reposition frames or comments afterward. It does not name an alternative tool or spell out when not to use it, but for a tool with no direct sibling equivalent the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.