set_axis_align

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'set' without detailing side effects, such as whether existing alignment values are overwritten, what happens if the frame is not auto-layout, or any permission requirements. The SPACE_BETWEEN note is in the schema but not in the description.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the action and target.

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 is minimal but sufficient for a simple setter given the complete schema. However, it lacks behavioral transparency and explicit usage guidance, and with no output schema it does not mention return values. The overall context is adequate but not rich.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not need to because the schema is thorough.

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: setting both primary and counter axis alignment on an auto-layout frame. It uses a specific verb ('set') and identifies the target resource ('auto-layout frame'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_item_spacing or set_layout_mode.

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 for auto-layout frames ('for an auto-layout frame'), but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. No mention of alternatives like set_layout_mode.

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