list_layouts

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it reads the project only and does not save or mutate the .aprx file. This is explicit about non-destructiveness, which is valuable for an agent.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, usage context, and behavioral note. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema (which likely details return format), the description covers the necessary context: tool purpose, what it returns (layout names, page sizes, page units), and its read-only nature. No gaps for an agent to select and invoke this 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?

The only parameter, aprx_path, is described in the input schema as 'Absolute .aprx path.' The tool description adds minimal additional meaning (mentions 'saved ArcGIS Pro .aprx project'), but the schema already provides adequate clarity for this single, straightforward parameter.

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 it lists all layouts in an ArcGIS Pro .aprx project, using the specific arcpy.mp listLayouts method. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_layers or list_maps, which handle different project components.

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 explicitly says to use this tool to discover layout details before exporting or modifying, providing clear context. It also states the tool is read-only, implying it's safe for exploration. No explicit when-not-to-use is given, but the context is sufficient.

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