set_current_layer_opacity

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

There are no annotations, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It states the operation (set value) and scope (current layer, deck A/B) but does not disclose side effects, error conditions, or whether the action is reversible or destructive. Additional context like valid range for 'value' is missing.

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 sentence, which is concise but omits critical details. While brevity is positive, the trade-off is incomplete information, making it barely adequate.

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 2 required parameters with no descriptions, no annotations, and an output schema that is not referenced, the description leaves significant gaps. It does not explain how to use the parameters or what the output represents, making it incomplete for correct invocation.

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%, meaning the schema itself provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description does not explain the 'deck' parameter (e.g., accepted values 'A' or 'B') or the 'value' parameter (e.g., valid opacity range). This leaves the agent with insufficient information to correctly populate arguments.

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 sets the opacity value for the current layer on deck A or B. It uses a specific verb ('set') and resource (current layer opacity) and distinguishes from similar tools like set_layer_opacity by specifying 'current layer'.

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 its sibling set_layer_opacity or other set_* tools. The description does not mention usage context, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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