Layout Builder Update

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the critical destructive trait: supplying `layout` replaces every existing section. It also reveals a surprising read-only behavior (state report when both optional params are omitted), which an agent would not guess from the name 'update'. It does not mention permissions or reversibility.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then branching into the parameter-conditional behaviors. No filler or restatement of the name.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the destructive replace semantics are covered. The gap is the undocumented `entity_type`/`bundle` inputs, which matter for a tool whose entire scope is defined by those two required parameters.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains what `layout` and `lock` do in behavioral terms, but `entity_type` and `bundle` are only implied by 'for a bundle' — no accepted values or format are given, leaving two of four parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 ('Update the Layout Builder layout for a bundle') and explicitly relates the tool to its sibling layout_builder_create, so an agent can distinguish the two without opening either schema.

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?

It lays out the three operating modes keyed to parameters: layout given replaces everything, layout omitted applies only lock, both omitted just reports state. That is strong conditional guidance, though it never states when an agent should prefer this tool over layout_builder_create or layout_builder_override_remove.

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