Create Layer

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the layer is created at the document root, that update_if_exists:true updates the existing layer in place, and that the operation is idempotent. It does not mention what happens if a duplicate name exists without update_if_exists, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 dense sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and each clause adds useful information—creation location, idempotent update behavior, and configuration options.

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 create/update tool with a nested flags object and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential decision points: where the layer is created, how idempotency works, and how to configure color/flags. It leaves some details to the schema, but nothing critical blocks correct invocation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by explaining the update_if_exists behavior in detail and showing that color and flags can be passed together or separately. It also gives example flag names, reinforcing what those parameters do.

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 specific verb 'Create' and the resource 'LayerObject at the document's layer root'. It also distinguishes the idempotent update behavior via update_if_exists, making it easy for an agent to understand what this tool does without confusing it with layer-related siblings.

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 main use case—creating a new layer or idempotently updating an existing one by name—but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like assign_to_layer or set_layer_flags, nor does it list exclusions. Usage context is clear only by inference.

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