delete_layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Delete', which implies destructiveness but omits details like irreversibility, effect on child elements, or undo support.

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?

Extremely concise: two lines plus an Args list. Every word adds value, action verb is front-loaded, and no sentences are wasted.

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 destructive tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers core function and parameter purpose. However, it lacks details on failure modes (e.g., missing layer), side effects, or recovery options, leaving gaps for new users.

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 0%, and the description provides brief parameter descriptions ('Aseprite file to modify', 'Name of the layer to delete'), adding meaning beyond schema titles. While minimal, it clarifies context for both parameters.

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 deletes a layer by name, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete_frame' or 'clear_cel', and includes explicit parameter names and brief definitions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., hiding a layer, merging, or clearing cels). The description does not mention prerequisites, errors, or appropriate contexts.

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