Add Layout Label

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It hints at coordinate units (mm) and expression support, but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the layout must exist, error handling, side effects, or if the operation is destructive. It provides some insight but is incomplete.

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 concise (two sentences), front-loads the purpose, and each sentence adds value. It could be slightly more structured or include more parameter hints, but it is efficient and clear.

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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description only covers text, color, and vaguely coordinates. It omits explanation of required layout_name, width, height, font_size, and defaults. It lacks information about error conditions, behavior when layout doesn't exist, and return values, making it incomplete for confident use.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains text dynamic content and color hex format, and implies coordinate units (mm) for x,y. However, it does not explain width, height, font_size, or layout_name, leaving many parameters ambiguous. The description adds partial meaning beyond the schema but is not comprehensive.

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 action (Add), the resource (text label to a print layout), and provides specific details about dynamic content and color format. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like add_layout_legend or add_layout_map by focusing on labels.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_layout_legend. It lacks context on prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear decision support.

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