aedt_get_nominal_variation

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

The description implies a read operation but lacks explicit behavioral details such as side effects, permissions, or what determines string vs dictionary return. With no annotations, more transparency would be beneficial.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core purpose efficiently. There is no unnecessary text, though it could benefit from parameter details.

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 simple schema and lack of annotations, the description is minimally adequate but fails to explain the parameter's role or the distinction between return types, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 only parameter 'with_values' is not described in the schema or description. The description hints at string or dictionary return but does not connect it to the parameter, leaving the agent uncertain about its effect.

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 the nominal variation string or dictionary from the active design, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools. However, it could be improved by explaining what 'nominal variation' means in context.

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 like aedt_get_variables or aedt_list_variations. There is no mention of prerequisites or context, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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