set_visible_layers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose replacement semantics — 'others are hidden' — which is important, but it does not cover validation, prerequisites, or whether the change is editor-only.

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?

Very concise and front-loaded; the first sentence gives the core action. The Args block is standard and not wasteful.

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 need not be explained. For a one-parameter setter, the description covers the key replacement behavior but leaves usage context — when to call it and where layer names come from — to inference.

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% and the only parameter is an array of strings. The description adds meaning by stating it is a full list of layer names and that omitted layers are hidden, though it does not specify name format or valid values.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: set layer visibility in the editor. The action is clear, but it does not differentiate itself from nearby tools like set_active_layer or list_board_layers.

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?

Implied usage is to control which layers are visible by passing a full list. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as set_active_layer or list_board_layers for discovering layer names.

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