set_current_layer_solo

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

No annotations provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral information. It does not explain what 'solo' means in this context (e.g., whether it mutes other layers, is a toggle, or requires permissions). Behavioral implications are unclear.

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 concise sentence. However, for a tool with only 2 parameters, it could afford more detail without being verbose. The brevity sacrifices 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 low complexity (2 simple params) and the presence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the effect of solo, valid deck values, or the behavior of the tool. More context is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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%. The description does not explain the 'deck' parameter's valid values (e.g., 'A' or 'B') or what the 'enabled' boolean does (e.g., true sets solo, false unsets it). The schema provides no additional info.

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 verb 'Set', the resource 'solo for the current layer', and the scope 'on deck A or B'. It distinguishes from sibling 'set_layer_solo' by specifying 'current layer', implying it acts on the currently selected 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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'set_layer_solo'. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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