list_layouts

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

The description explicitly states 'Reads the project only and does not save or mutate the .aprx file', which is critical behavioral information. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and handles it well, though it could mention potential errors or access requirements.

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 extremely concise, containing only two sentences that directly convey the purpose, usage, and safety. Every sentence earns its place, and the most important information is 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, output schema provided), the description covers purpose, read-only nature, and usage context completely. No additional information is needed for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 input schema already provides a detailed description for aprx_path, including constraints on PathGuard and that it operates on saved files. The tool description does not add new information about the parameter, and with 0% schema coverage, it does not compensate as expected. However, the schema description is sufficient, so the lack of addition is not harmful.

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 explicitly states 'List all layouts in a saved ArcGIS Pro .aprx project using arcpy.mp listLayouts', clearly specifying the verb and resource. It also mentions the use case of discovering layout names, page sizes, and page units, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_layers or list_maps.

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 advises to use this tool 'before exporting or modifying a layout', providing clear context. While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, the usage guidance is practical and sufficient for the typical workflow.

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