layer_set_scale_visibility

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses behavioral details: enabled=False disables restriction without losing range, omitting bounds leaves them unchanged, and explains scale denominators.

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?

Four sentences: one succinct purpose statement, then compact, well-structured explanations. No excess words, every sentence adds value.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description covers most aspects (scale bounds, enabled behavior), but does not clarify behavior when min_scale > max_scale or both null with enabled=true. Minor gaps.

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 description must add meaning. It explains min_scale/max_scale as scale denominators, their zoom direction, and the semantics of enabled=False and omitted bounds, far exceeding schema details.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Restrict a layer's visibility to a range of map scales.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like layer_set_visibility (on/off) and scale-related 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 explains how to use min_scale/max_scale and the effect of enabled=False. It implies usage context (scale-based visibility) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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