arcpro-mcp

by qiobn

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Python

Local

Remove Layer

remove_layer

Destructive

Remove a named layer from an ArcGIS Pro map. This deletion is permanent and cannot be undone.

Instructions

Remove a layer from a map by name. This cannot be undone.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "layer": "<layer>"
    },
    "name": "remove_layer"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`layer`	Yes
`map_name`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotation already indicates destructiveHint: true, and the description adds 'This cannot be undone' for additional context on irreversibility. There is no contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words, but the brevity leads to omission of important parameter information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simple tool and existence of an output schema, the description omits behavior for edge cases like non-existent layers or the effect of the default map_name.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description mentions 'by name' hinting at the layer parameter, but with 0% schema coverage, it fails to clarify the map_name parameter or provide details on acceptable values or formats.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'Remove' and a clear resource 'layer from a map', and it distinguishes from sibling tools like add_raster_layer and set_layer_visibility.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description warns that the action cannot be undone but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_layer_visibility, nor provides exclusions or prerequisites.

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