aedt_apply_solved_variation

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

No annotations are present, so the description must bear the full burden. It only says 'apply' without explaining side effects, error conditions, or required context (e.g., design must be solved). This is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it lacks necessary detail. It is not well-structured to convey behavioral or usage information efficiently.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the output (though an output schema exists), error handling, or the impact on the design context. More context is needed for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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 description does not explain the 'variation' parameter beyond calling it a dictionary. With 0% schema description coverage and an open-ended type (additionalProperties: true), the agent needs more guidance on expected keys and values. The description adds minimal value over the schema.

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 clearly states it applies a solved variation dictionary to the active design context. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like aedt_set_variable or aedt_get_nominal_variation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as whether a solved variation must exist, or when it is appropriate to apply a solved variation.

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