krita_get_layer_preview

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavior beyond that: it requires specific pixel/color formats, preserves visibility and active layer, and excludes other layers. This gives the agent a clear side-effect model.

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?

Three tight sentences, no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the constraints and side-effect guarantees each earn their place.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description states the return format (inline PNG), the scope (layer/group within canvas bounds), prerequisites (RGBA/U8/sRGB), and behavior (preserves visibility/active layer, excludes other layers). This is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden of explaining parameters. It hints at node selection through 'explicit layer/group' and at output size through 'inline PNG', but it does not explain instance_id, document_id, or max_edge semantics.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Return an inline PNG of the explicit layer/group projection within canvas bounds.' The phrase 'Other layers are excluded' distinguishes it from sibling preview tools like krita_get_preview or krita_get_region_preview.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: when a layer/group projection is needed and other layers should be excluded. It states the required image format (RGBA/U8/sRGB), but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state 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.