List Layouts

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

The annotation indicates readOnlyHint: true, so the description does not need to re-emphasize safety. It adds that it returns names and page counts, which is useful. No further behavioral details are necessary for this read-only, stateless operation.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the primary action. It contains no unnecessary words and earns its place by providing key output details.

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?

For a simple, parameterless tool with read-only behavior and an output schema, the description is complete. It names the return values (names and page counts) and the scope (current project). No gaps remain.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter information, but none is needed. The schema describes all parameters (none), and the description's mention of 'names and page counts' hints at the output structure.

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 print layouts in the current project, returning names and page counts. The verb 'list' and resource 'print layouts' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_layout_info' which likely targets a single layout.

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 explicitly provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'get_layout_info' for details on a specific layout. However, the context of listing all layouts is clear, and the tool is simple enough that usage is implied.

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