create_autolayout_frame

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a mutation ('Buat' / create) and lists supported visual features, but does not state what document state is modified, whether an active file or page is required, what is returned, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that immediately identifies the tool's purpose and then lists key capabilities. It is dense because it enumerates many features, but it is not padded or repetitive.

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?

The schema is rich and fully documented, which covers the large parameter surface. However, for a complex creation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description still omits behavioral details such as side effects, return value, and usage guidance, leaving clear 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 description coverage is 100%, so all 20 parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description names several feature areas but adds no syntax, constraints, or meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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: creating an Auto-Layout container, and enumerates the key capabilities such as direction, padding, gap, alignment, sizing, corner smoothing, and effects. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling creation tools like create_node, create_component, or create_responsive_system.

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 what the tool creates and gives a generic motivation ('so elements are not messy or overlapping'), but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or when to prefer this over sibling tools such as create_responsive_system or create_node.

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