List Layers

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

With readOnlyHint=true annotation covering the read-only nature, the description adds value by detailing the exact return structure—name, optional color, and the full flag dictionary. This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies what the agent can expect, though it does not discuss any exceptions like empty documents.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second lists the return contents. Every element is necessary for understanding the tool, making it efficiently structured and 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?

For a simple enumeration tool with no parameters and a read-only annotation, the description provides sufficient information: what it does and what it returns. It omits edge cases like an empty document, but for a list operation this is a minor gap and the overall context is complete enough.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description correctly avoids redundant parameter explanations, which meets the baseline 4 for tools with no parameters.

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 action (enumerate) and resource (every LayerObject in the active document), and specifies the return fields. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_object_layer by focusing on all layers rather than a single object's layer, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 all layers, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus related ones like get_object_layer or set_layer_flags. The context is not spelled out, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate scenario.

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