merge_layer_down

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

No annotations are provided, and the description fails to disclose that the merged layer is removed after merging. This is a significant behavioral trait that an agent should know. The description only says 'merge' without clarifying the effect on the merged layer.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence describing the action followed by a clear Args section. No unnecessary words, and the key constraint is front-loaded in the Args. Every sentence is essential.

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 is a mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what happens to the merged layer, any prerequisites (e.g., layer must exist), and the result state. It fails to describe the outcome, making it incomplete for a safe agent 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?

The schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description's Args section adds meaning: 'filename' is described as 'Aseprite file to modify' and 'layer_name' as 'Layer to merge down (must not be the bottom layer)'. This provides context beyond the schema, though it could specify path requirements for filename.

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 action: merging a layer into the layer directly below it. The verb 'merge' and the resource 'layer' are specific, and the tool name aligns well. It distinguishes from siblings like 'flatten_sprite' (merges all) and 'delete_layer'.

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 provides a constraint (layer must not be bottom) but lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'flatten_sprite' or 'merge_layer_down' (though there is no sibling merge). Usage is implied but not explicit about when to choose this over other layer operations.

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