Get Layer By ID

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and destructiveHint. The description adds context by specifying the API category (Project Management > Document Markup) and the full REST endpoint path, which helps the agent understand the tool's context and behavior beyond annotations.

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 concise with 4 sentences, front-loading the purpose and usage. Every sentence adds value: purpose, when to use, return type, and API context. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description provides sufficient context: it returns a JSON object describing the Document Markup records, lists required params, and gives the API endpoint. It does not detail pagination but that is in the schema.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters. The description lists the required parameters (company_id, project_id, layer_id) and includes the endpoint path, which adds minimal value beyond the schema. Pagination parameters are only in 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 clearly states it retrieves a specific layer by ID for Document Markup records. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_layers' or 'get_layers_for_context'.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Document Markup records by its identifier,' which implies when to use it, but does not provide when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives such as listing all layers.

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