Set Layer Property

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

The description discloses that this tool sets properties and provides supported values with types/ranges. Annotations already include idempotentHint=true, and the description does not contradict or add major behavioral context beyond the property list. No side effects or prerequisites are mentioned.

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: one sentence followed by a clear list. It is front-loaded with the purpose and immediately provides the essential details. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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's low complexity (3 params, no output schema), the description adequately covers the main action and supported properties. However, it lacks context about layer_id validity, error handling, or return behavior. With no output schema, a brief note on what the tool returns (or that it returns nothing) 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%, but the description compensates by explaining the 'property' parameter's allowed values (opacity, name, min_scale, max_scale, scale_visibility) with types and ranges. It does not fully detail the expected format for 'value' (e.g., string representation of floats), but provides significant clarity beyond the schema alone.

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 'Set a layer property' with a specific verb and resource, and lists supported properties (opacity, name, min_scale, max_scale, scale_visibility), distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_layer_visibility or set_layer_style which have more specific purposes.

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 implies usage for setting basic layer properties by listing them, but does not explicitly exclude cases where siblings like set_layer_visibility or set_layer_style would be more appropriate. No guidance on when not to use this tool.

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