rhino_list_layers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds useful behavioral context by enumerating the returned layer properties (colors, visibility, lock state, object counts), which is beyond what annotations provide. It does not describe pagination or performance, but that is not critical for a simple list tool.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the action and the returned data. There is no wasted wording or redundancy, and the key 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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema is provided, the description is complete. It names the resource (layers), the scope (all), and the attributes returned. There is no missing information an agent would need to call it 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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema provides no parameter information. The description does not need to explain parameters, but it does clarify that it lists 'all' layers without any filtering or arguments. With 0 params, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description adequately conveys that no inputs are required.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' with the resource 'all layers' and specifies the exact data included (colors, visibility, lock state, object counts). This distinguishes it from other list tools like rhino_list_blocks, rhino_list_views, etc., which target different resources.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving layer information, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. For example, it does not mention that layer manipulation tools (create/delete/reset) are separate. The purpose makes the primary use case obvious, but there is no explicit guidance about exclusions or sibling tools.

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