rhino_layer_unisolate

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It clearly states the state change: all layers are shown and the isolation state is undone. It does not discuss secondary effects like whether manually hidden layers are also forced visible, but the primary behavior is transparent.

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 five words long, front-loads the action, and contains no filler. Every part earns its place, and the clarifying parenthetical adds meaningful context without bloating the text.

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 zero-parameter visibility command with an output schema, the description is complete: it conveys the action, the scope, and the context (undo isolation). There is no need to explain return values or parameters, and no prerequisites are missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema already fully covers inputs and the description has nothing parameter-specific to add. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description's 'all layers' usefully clarifies the scope of the operation.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Show all layers') and ties it to the precise operation 'undo isolation'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like rhino_layer_isolate and rhino_layer_list, since it is an action that restores layer visibility rather than a listing or isolation command.

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 parenthetical 'undo isolation' implies the correct context: use after rhino_layer_isolate has been applied. However, it never explicitly names alternatives or states when not to use it, so the usage guidance is implied rather than concrete.

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