duplicate_layer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It notes that the copy is inserted at the top but does not explicitly state that the original remains unchanged or describe other side effects like attribute copying or naming. Basic behavior is disclosed, but details are lacking.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and result. It contains no redundant or unnecessary 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?

For a simple two-parameter operation with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior and placement. However, it omits prerequisites (e.g., layer must exist) and does not explicitly mention that it's a mutating operation, although 'duplicate' implies creating a new layer. It is adequate but minimal.

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 has no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain the roles of image_id and layer_id. It merely says 'a layer' without clarifying which image contains it or what the IDs refer to. With 0% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate for the missing parameter information.

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 identifies the action (duplicate), the resource (layer), and the outcome (insert copy at top). It distinguishes this tool from siblings such as create_layer and move_layer by specifying the duplication and placement.

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 when to use the tool (when you need a copy of an existing layer) but does not explicitly compare it with alternatives or state when not to use it. The usage context is inferred rather than stated.

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