batch_create_layers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the creation behavior ('Create multiple layers at once'), ordering semantics, and a specific constraint about background layers. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects, error conditions, or what happens if the composition doesn't exist.

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 perfectly concise with three sentences that each earn their place: the core purpose, ordering rules, and a critical best practice. It's front-loaded with the main action and wastes no words while delivering essential information.

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 batch creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by explaining ordering behavior and background placement. However, it doesn't address what the tool returns (layer IDs, success status) or potential error scenarios, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable context about parameter semantics by explaining that 'Order matters! First = top layer, Last = bottom layer' and reinforcing 'Put backgrounds at the END of array.' This provides crucial usage guidance beyond the schema's structural documentation.

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 specific action ('Create multiple layers at once') and resource ('layers'), distinguishing it from single-layer creation siblings like 'add_solid_layer' or 'add_text_layer'. It explicitly mentions batch creation, which sets it apart from individual layer 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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('Create multiple layers at once') and includes critical ordering instructions ('first item becomes Layer 1 (top), last item becomes bottom layer') and a specific rule ('Create backgrounds LAST!'). This gives clear operational context for when batch creation is appropriate.

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