layout

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is a configuration tool (non-destructive implied) and explains the partial update behavior, but does not describe return values, side effects, or authentication needs.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and each sentence adds value. No redundant or verbose phrasing.

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?

With 19 optional parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that presumably describes return values, the description covers basic behavior but lacks detail on many parameters and usage context. It is minimally adequate.

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 0%, but the description only adds meaning to the 'section_break' parameter with a detailed explanation. The other 18 parameters rely solely on their names for interpretation, which is insufficient given no enum values or descriptions in the 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 the tool configures document typesetting and layout, using a specific verb ('Configure') and resource. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'edit' or 'document', the purpose is unambiguous.

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 notes that only provided parameters are changed (a usage hint), but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'edit' for page breaks. It implies usage for layout configuration but no explicit when-not-to.

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