shift_layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It states 'Translate' implying modification but does not clarify if it's destructive, what happens to pixels that shift out of bounds (clipping vs wrapping beyond wrap parameter), or authentication requirements.

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?

Single sentence of 12 words, front-loaded with the core action and optional behavior. No redundant or extra information.

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 having 7 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is extremely brief. It omits important context like prerequisites (e.g., layer must exist), destructive nature, return value (render?), and behavior beyond translation (e.g., whether the operation is undoable).

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 description explains dx/dy as translation offsets and mentions 'wrapping around the edges' for the wrap parameter, adding value over the schema where dx, dy, and wrap lack descriptions. However, it does not specify units or range for dx/dy, and the other parameters have schema descriptions, so the net addition is moderate.

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 'Translate the whole layer by (dx,dy)', specifying the verb 'Translate', the resource 'whole layer', and the parameters (dx,dy). It also mentions optional wrapping, distinguishing it from other transformation tools like move_region which shift selections.

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 (e.g., move_region, set_pixels). No information about prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it.

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