add_light_layer

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden, but it only names the action. It does not explain side effects, required parameters, whether an active composition is needed, failure behavior, or how adding a light layer differs from other layer additions.

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 short but under-specified rather than appropriately concise. A single phrase that merely unpacks the tool name is not enough for a six-parameter tool with no annotations.

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 six unannotated parameters, no output schema, and many sibling layer-creation tools, the description is far too incomplete. It does not explain what a light layer is, where it is added, or how the inputs configure it.

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%, and the description provides no parameter meaning. The six parameters such as type, color, compId, compName, and intensity must be inferred from names alone, with no explanation of the enum values or object shape.

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 'Add a light layer' is a direct restatement of the tool name and adds no new information. It identifies the action and resource but leaves ambiguous what a light layer is and what adding it entails.

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 given about when to call this tool instead of sibling layer-creation tools such as add_solid_layer, add_text_layer, or add_camera_layer. There are no prerequisites, composition context, or alternative-tool cues.

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