set_layer_filter

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Set value', implying a mutation, but does not describe side effects, required permissions, value ranges, or any behavioral traits like overwrite or combine behavior.

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 of nine words with no redundancy. It is maximally concise for the information it conveys, though that information is minimal.

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 three required parameters with no schema descriptions and no enums, the description is insufficient. An agent lacks information on valid inputs (e.g., deck strings, layer range, value range) and the output schema is not described, leaving significant gaps 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 has zero description coverage. The description adds context for 'deck' (A or B) and 'layer' (specific), but does not clarify valid values for 'value' or numeric ranges for layer. This is partially helpful but incomplete.

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 action (set) and the target (value for a specific layer on deck A/B). It distinguishes from sibling tools like set_deck_filter and set_current_layer_filter by specifying 'specific layer' and 'deck A or B', but it does not explicitly differentiate from set_current_layer_filter which also sets a layer filter but for the 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or restrictions. For a tool with many siblings, this omission reduces its helpfulness for correct selection.

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