Get Complete Layer Structure By Context Type And Type ID

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, meaning the tool modifies state. The description acknowledges creation but focuses on retrieval. It fails to clearly explain that the tool may create a default context and/or Document Markup records, and under what conditions. The side-effect of creation is mentioned but not fully detailed (e.g., what triggers it, whether it's always or conditionally).

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 overly long and includes redundant information (required parameters, endpoint path). It mixes a retrieval narrative with a creation narrative, making it inefficient. Key information is buried, and the structure does not front-load the most critical behavior.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain the return value clearly. It states 'returns the created object on success (HTTP 201)' but does not describe what the hierarchy looks like when no creation occurs. The description is incomplete for a tool that has both retrieval and creation aspects.

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?

The input schema covers all 7 parameters with descriptions, and the description lists the required ones. However, the description mentions 'Creates a new Document Markup records' without any corresponding parameter for the markup data (e.g., markup content). This creates confusion about what the tool actually does with parameters. The description adds little beyond the schema.

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 starts by stating 'Retrieve the complete hierarchy', which suggests a read operation, but then contradicts itself by saying 'Creates a new Document Markup records and returns the created object'. This muddles the core purpose. The tool name implies retrieval, but the description hints at creation. Purpose is unclear and inconsistent.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_contexts', 'get_layers', or 'get_or_create_context_with_hierarchy'. The statement 'Use this to perform the get complete action on Document Markup records' is vague and fails to differentiate from siblings or specify prerequisites.

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