aedt_design_summary

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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavioral traits. 'Return' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, which is appropriate for a summary tool. However, it does not explicitly confirm lack of modification or disclose other behaviors like data sources or performance implications.

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 clear sentence that front-loads the action and lists key components. It is concise but could be slightly more structured (e.g., listing components in a list) to improve scanability.

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 existence of many sibling summary tools and the presence of an output schema (undetailed here), the description provides a basic overview but lacks depth. It does not explain what 'compact summary' entails in terms of fields or structure, which could be important for an AI agent to interpret results.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds no parameter information. Per guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0-parameter tools. The description does not need to clarify parameters.

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 the tool returns a compact summary of session, projects, setups, boundaries, and modeler objects. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the listed components differentiate it from other summary tools like 'aedt_configuration_summary' or 'aedt_modeler_summary', though it does not explicitly name these alternatives.

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 the many sibling summary tools. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer its applicability.

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