Api solutions list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing usable beyond that — no mention of pagination (limit/offset/max_pages are present in the schema), filtering behavior, or result shape; the 'serializer context' phrasing is internal jargon an agent cannot act on.

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?

One short sentence with no wasted clauses, but the brevity comes from under-specification rather than efficiency — the single sentence conveys an implementation detail instead of the tool's contract.

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?

A 27-parameter, no-output-schema list endpoint needs substantial description to be callable; this one supplies nothing about filtering, pagination, or ordering semantics. Against this complexity level the description is wholly inadequate.

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?

There are 27 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description explains none of them. Filter fields such as search, ordering, is_active, criticality, and the many dora_* filters are completely undocumented in both schema and description, so the description fails the burden it carries here.

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 description is an internal Django implementation note ('Override the list method to inject optimized data into the serializer context') rather than a statement of what the tool does for a caller. An agent cannot tell from this that it lists 'solutions' (third-party/provider solutions) or how it differs from siblings like ciso_assistant_api_solutions_retrieve or ciso_assistant_api_solutions_object_retrieve.

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 alternatives among the many solutions_* siblings, and no prerequisites or pagination context. The only implied usage is 'list', which the name already conveys.

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