Set Layer Labeling

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It confirms the tool is a mutation (configure), but does not explain side effects (e.g., overwriting existing labeling, required permissions, or behavior when field_name is null with enabled true).

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose, second covers all optional parameters. No wasted words, front-loaded with the action and key 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?

Given no output schema and 5 parameters, the description partially accounts for inputs but misses layer_id and does not describe output or potential errors. Adequate for basic use but not fully comprehensive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for enabled, field_name, font_size, and color, including a hex format hint for color. However, layer_id (required) is not described, leaving a gap.

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 configures labeling for a vector layer, using a specific verb ('Configure') and resource ('labeling'). It lists the main parameters (enabled, field_name, font_size, color), distinguishing it from other set_ tools that modify different layer properties.

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 explains how to disable labels and set the attribute field, but lacks guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_layer_labeling for reading or other set_ tools. No prerequisites or context for when labeling should be configured.

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