krita_merge_vector_layer_down

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations by disclosing that 'Source is removed after copying' and that there is 'no atomic undo'. This gives the agent important expectations about failure modes and side effects.

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 three tight sentences: operation and result, preconditions, then side effects and reuse guidance. Every clause carries operational value, and the most important scoping information is front-loaded.

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 destructive operation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, the target relationship, the source removal side effect, undo limitations, and operation_id reuse. These are the main things an agent needs to call it correctly and safely.

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 must compensate. It gives one useful parameter cue with 'Reuse operation_id', but it does not explain node_id, document_id, or instance_id beyond their self-evident names. With four required parameters and no schema descriptions, this is a meaningful gap.

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 states the specific operation: 'Merge into the immediately lower sibling vector layer', naming both the verb and the target resource. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling krita_merge_layer_down by explicitly targeting vector layers and by adding the outcome 'preserving editable paths and stacking'.

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 preconditions for use: active view, visible full-opacity normal layers without masks/alpha inheritance, and unprotected visible path shapes. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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