gimp.list_layers

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It lists the returned information, implying a read-only operation, but does not mention error conditions (e.g., invalid image_id), side effects, or performance considerations. It adds some value but leaves gaps.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word serves a purpose, and it is easy to parse quickly.

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 has one parameter and no output schema, the description does a good job specifying what output fields to expect (IDs, names, visibility, opacity, dimensions, offsets). However, it does not specify the output structure (e.g., a list of objects) or ordering, which would improve completeness.

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%, so the description should explain the parameter 'image_id'. However, it only implies its purpose through context ('for an image') without explicit clarification. The description does not add significant meaning beyond 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 lists layers for an image and enumerates the returned fields (IDs, names, visibility, opacity, dimensions, offsets). The verb and resource are specific, though it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like 'gimp.get_image' or 'gimp.set_layer_properties'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'gimp.get_image' for a single image, 'gimp.list_images' for all images). There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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