Add Layout Legend

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions basic behavior (link to map item, position in mm) but does not disclose potential side effects, error conditions, or required permissions. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence conveying core information without excess. Efficient and 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?

Description is minimal for a tool with 7 parameters and no output schema. It lacks details on return value, error handling, and prerequisites (e.g., layout must exist). Needs more completeness for safe invocation.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. It explains the meaning of x, y, width, height (in mm) and map_item_id (defaults to first map item), but does not cover title or layout_name. Partial compensation, baseline for 0% coverage is 4 if fully covered.

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 tool's purpose: adding a legend to a print layout. It specifies the key behavior (linked to a map item, defaults to first) and units (mm), distinguishing it from sibling add_layout_* tools.

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 context (default map item, units) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives. Given sibling tools are for different elements, usage is largely implied, so no major deduction.

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