layouts_push

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

Description adds valuable details beyond annotations: per-file success/failure breakdown, non-layout entries captured as failures, and error handling that does not abort remaining pushes. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Single dense paragraph with no wasted sentences. Each sentence serves a purpose: action, filtering, behavior, error handling, and recommendation.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers behavior, error handling, and usage context. It even includes a pre-flight recommendation, exceeding minimal requirements.

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 100%, but description adds context: target_dir must contain manifest.json, files=null/omitted pushes all manifest entries. This supplements the schema meaningfully.

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?

Description clearly states the tool reads manifest.json and .tpl files from target_dir and PUTs to /layouts/{id}, with optional file filtering. This distinctly separates it from sibling layout tools like layout_create or layouts_pull.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (push layouts from a pulled tree) and recommends pre-flight snapshot. Does not mention alternatives like layout_create for individual pushes, but the sibling list provides context.

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