Api solutions dora discontinuing impact retrieve

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description says the endpoint allows solutions to be 'viewed or edited', implying mutation. That directly contradicts the read-only annotation and is the only behavioral claim the description makes.

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?

It is a single short, front-loaded sentence, so there is no bloat. But brevity here comes from boilerplate rather than precision — the sentence is generic template text that adds nothing specific to this endpoint.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description is the only place an agent could learn that this returns the DORA discontinuation-impact assessment for solutions. It omits that entirely, so the definition is incomplete for its one job.

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 there is no parameter semantics for the description to explain. Baseline 4 applies; the empty schema is self-explanatory.

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 sentence 'allows solutions to be viewed or edited' is generic DRF boilerplate that never mentions DORA, discontinuation impact, or the fact that this is a field-scoped retrieval endpoint. Nothing distinguishes it from the dozens of sibling `solutions_*` tools, so an agent cannot tell what resource or attribute it returns.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the alternative (e.g. `ciso_assistant_api_solutions_retrieve` for the full object) and no prerequisites. The only hint of scope is the tool name itself, which the description does not reinforce or explain.

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