Get Object's Layer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Return', but does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention error conditions or permissions. For a simple query this is adequate but not exemplary.

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 sentence with no wasted words, front-loading the key action and result.

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 and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. However, it could be slightly more complete by clarifying the return format (e.g., layer name or ID) or providing an example, but it's nearly sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds minimal value beyond the schema's 'Entity to query.' It briefly lists entity types (already in schema) and mentions the null return, which is about the output, not the parameter.

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 'Return' and the resource 'layer currently assigned to a target entity', listing the entity types (object, tag, material) and the null case. It distinguishes from sibling tools like assign_to_layer (which sets layers) and list_layers (which lists all layers).

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 (when you need the layer of an entity) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like assign_to_layer or list_layers, nor any preconditions or exclusions.

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