list-layer-effects

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists effects and optionally includes property details, but fails to describe the return format, whether effects are ordered, or the behavior when parameters are omitted. This leaves significant uncertainty for an AI agent selecting or invoking the tool.

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 at 9 words, front-loading the core purpose. It avoids unnecessary words, but could benefit from slightly more detail without sacrificing brevity, such as mentioning that effects are listed as an array of effect objects.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters and no output schema. The description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., a list of effect names, IDs, or full objects). It fails to provide enough context for an AI agent to fully understand the input-output behavior, making it incomplete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like includeProperties and maxDepth. The phrase 'optional recursive property details' loosely hints at these parameters but does not enhance understanding.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'effects on a layer', specifying the primary action. The phrase 'with optional recursive property details' adds specificity, distinguishing it from a simple enumeration. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'inspect-layer' or 'list-available-effects', which have overlapping functions.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where other tools like 'inspect-layer' would be more appropriate, nor does it suggest prerequisites or conditions for effective use.

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