export_layout_png

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool reads the .aprx project file and writes output within PathGuard allowed roots, and uses layout.exportToPNG. This provides sufficient transparency about disk operations and constraints.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded, and key details (DPI, transparency, path constraints) are efficiently included.

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 an output schema exists (not shown), the description doesn't need return values. It covers high-level context, tool method, and path restrictions. Could mention error cases or required ArcGIS Pro license, but overall adequate for a parameter-rich tool with good schema descriptions.

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 description does not add meaning beyond the input schema's property descriptions, but those descriptions are thorough. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already covers parameter details (e.g., resolution, overwrite).

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 'Export a selected ArcGIS Pro layout to a PNG image', specifying the verb, resource, and format. It distinguishes from siblings like export_layout_pdf by focusing on PNG output and providing specific use cases (previews, portfolio images, web graphics).

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 explicit usage scenarios: 'Use this for previews, portfolio images, web graphics, or presentation-ready map layouts'. It implies when to use but does not explicitly mention when not to use or name alternatives like export_layout_pdf.

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