delete_layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it deletes a layer but does not disclose consequences such as whether deletion is permanent, if it affects sibling layers, or if any undo is possible. This is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 short (three words), which is concise but underspecified. It could include more critical information without becoming verbose. Conciseness is only positive when it does not sacrifice clarity.

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 deletes a layer with four parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to identify the layer, what happens after deletion, or error conditions. Compare to well-described sibling tools; this falls short.

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 must explain each parameter's role. The description mentions none of the four parameters (compId, compName, layerName, layerIndex), leaving their semantics entirely unclear. The tool requires at least one identifying parameter, but no guidance on which combination is needed.

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 is 'Delete a layer', which clearly indicates the tool deletes a layer. However, it lacks specifics about what kind of layer (e.g., in a composition) and does not distinguish it from sibling tools like delete_marker or delete_composition. It is functional but minimal.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_composition or modify_layer. There is no mention of prerequisites, idempotency, or when deletion is irreversible. The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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