set_layout_sizing

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It only specifies the target (auto-layout frame) and omits critical constraints such as HUG being limited to frames/text, FILL being for auto-layout children only, and behavior when only one sizing parameter is set. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 that front-loads the action, resource, and target. It contains no unnecessary words or redundant details.

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?

Despite a clear purpose and strong schema support, the description lacks behavioral constraints, usage guidance relative to sibling tools, and handling of optional parameters. The absence of annotations makes this description insufficient for complete agent decision-making in a complex design tool context.

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?

The input schema provides full 100% coverage with detailed descriptions and enums for all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond naming horizontal and vertical sizing modes, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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') on a specific resource ('horizontal and vertical sizing modes for an auto-layout frame'), making it distinct from sibling tools like resize_node (which alters dimensions) or set_layout_mode (which sets layout type).

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 implies usage for auto-layout frames but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as resize_node or set_layout_mode, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond the auto-layout context.

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