keyboard_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only discloses the cost and payment method ($0.001 USDC via x402). It does not explain the tool's actual behavior, return values, side effects, or any operational characteristics.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. It front-loads the tool name and category but omits essential functional details, so the brevity does not aid understanding.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and any actual behavioral description, the tool's purpose, inputs, and outputs are entirely unclear. The only complete information is the cost, which is not enough to make the tool usable.

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 contains a single generic 'params' object with no tool-specific keys or descriptions. Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds no parameter semantics, leaving the actual inputs for keyboard_layout completely unspecified.

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 merely repeats the tool name ('keyboard layout') and labels it as 'Other Utilities tool' without stating a specific action or function. There is no verb describing what the tool does, and it does not distinguish from sibling utility tools.

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 is given on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or which alternatives might be more appropriate. The only context is the generic 'Other Utilities' category and cost information.

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