list_layout_styles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verb 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, but the description adds no further behavioral context such as whether styles depend on diagram kind or ordering. It is minimally transparent but not rich.

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?

One compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the operation and target clearly while leaving space for structured schema fields.

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 tool's simplicity, one required parameter, and an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context. It does not mention sibling tools or use timing, but the low complexity makes the overhead less critical.

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 diagram_id parameter. The phrase 'for a diagram' provides a small semantic link by implying diagram_id identifies the diagram whose styles are requested, but it adds no detail about format, constraints, or where the ID comes from.

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?

States the exact operation: 'List available auto-layout styles for a diagram.' The verb 'List' and the object 'auto-layout styles' clearly distinguish it from mutating or comparing alternatives like auto_layout_diagram and compare_layout_styles.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative contrast is provided. An agent can infer that listing styles is a precursor to choosing a layout, but the description never says so or mentions related tools such as auto_layout_diagram.

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