set_current_layer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavior (auto-creates the layer if missing) and specifies lineweight units. However, it does not clarify what happens if the layer already exists (e.g., whether color/lineweight are updated) or other side effects, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the second sentence adds practical value. Every word is purposeful, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and key parameter semantics (lineweight units). It lacks explicit statement about the tool's effect on subsequent drawing operations, but that is strongly implied by 'set current layer'. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for reliable use.

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. It adds meaning to 'lineweight' (unit MM and typical values) and mentions 'color' as a parameter, but does not explain the integer color code or expand on 'name'. It partially compensates for schema gaps but not fully.

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 the tool's function: 'Set current layer' with a specific behavior of auto-creating the layer if missing. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_layer and set_current_color by combining setting and creation with color/lineweight parameters.

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 provides practical guidance for lineweight values (walls 0.50, visible edges 0.35, etc.) and notes that lineweight is in MM. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_layer or set_current_color, leaving the usage context implied rather than explicit.

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