Set Active Layer

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

Annotations include 'idempotentHint: true', which the description does not reinforce or expand upon. The description fails to disclose potential side effects, such as changing the active layer's selection or map canvas behavior. No additional behavioral context is provided beyond what annotations imply.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to clarifying the tool's core function.

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 parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not address behavior on invalid input, return value, or error handling, leaving some contextual gaps for a complete understanding.

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%, placing a high burden on the description. The description only adds 'by layer ID', which vaguely indicates the parameter's role but does not explain what constitutes a valid layer ID or address the parameter's semantics beyond the schema's type hint.

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?

Description clearly states the action ('Set'), resource ('active layer'), and scope ('in QGIS layer panel by layer ID'). It distinctly sets this tool apart from siblings like 'get_active_layer', which retrieves the active layer, and 'set_layer_visibility', which modifies visibility.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., valid layer ID obtained via 'get_layers'), or alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or state that setting active layer may affect UI focus or selection.

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