set_layer_visibility

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, error conditions, or whether the operation affects only the specified layer. It is a minimal statement with no additional context.

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 one short sentence, concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary, though it is under-specified in other dimensions.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description lacks context about required preconditions, relationship to sibling tools, or error handling. The existence of an output schema is not referenced, and the description alone is insufficient for an agent to know how to obtain a valid layer_id.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the parameters. While the names (layer_id, visible) are somewhat self-explanatory, the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already shows.

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 resource ('layer visibility'), differentiating it from sibling tools like set_layer_opacity or set_layer_mode. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 information about when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention that layer_id should come from list_layers or that it operates on the active image.

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