Get Layer Extent

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it's read-only. The description adds that the tool returns spatial extent and CRS, providing useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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. It front-loads the key action ('Get the spatial extent') and specifies the outputs succinctly.

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 are documented elsewhere. For a simple read-only query with one parameter, the description provides adequate context. No error handling or prerequisites are mentioned, but they are not critical for such a tool.

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 0%, placing the burden on the description. However, the description does not explain the parameter 'layer_id' (e.g., format, how to obtain it). The tool name and purpose hint at the layer reference, but no explicit guidance is given, so the agent must infer meaning from schema alone.

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 tool retrieves the spatial extent (bounding box) and CRS of a layer. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like get_layer_crs (only CRS) and get_canvas_extent (canvas extent, not layer).

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?

While the description implies usage for obtaining a layer's bounding box and CRS, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_layer_crs, get_canvas_extent). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative references.

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