home_layout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it only obliquely signals an unauthenticated/guest context. It says nothing about whether this is a read-only lookup, whether it depends on session or location, how it is cached, or what happens if the layout is unavailable.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no wasted words and the resource is front-loaded. However, the brevity comes from under-specification rather than economy, so it is concise but not informative.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Still, for a tool with an undocumented 'entry' parameter, no annotations, and several plausible siblings, the definition omits the guest-session context, the meaning of 'entry', and why one would pick this over home_products or display_panels.

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% for the single 'entry' parameter, so the description must compensate, and it does not mention the parameter at all. An agent is left to infer that 'entry' selects a layout entry point and that its default 'home' is valid, with no idea what other values are accepted.

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 names a resource (CMS home layout) and a scope (for guests), which lets an agent guess it returns merchandising/content layout data rather than products. But it has no verb (fetch/retrieve) and does not distinguish it from near neighbors like home_products, display_panels, or content_page, leaving the specific purpose vague.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance at all. The phrase 'for guests' hints at an unauthenticated context but is never tied to a decision such as 'use this instead of home_products when the session is not logged in', and no prerequisite or alternative is named.

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