aedt_insert_near_field

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only says 'through a controlled PyAEDT helper', which is vague. It does not explain whether the tool modifies a design, creates a new object, or requires a solved state. Critical behavioral aspects are missing.

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 excessively so. It lacks essential details, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise. The structure could front-load the purpose, but it does so at the expense of completeness.

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 3 parameters (one with 5 options) and no parameter descriptions, the description is wholly inadequate. Even with an output schema, the lack of input guidance and behavioral context makes this tool poorly documented for selection and invocation.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. The enum for field_kind is not explained (e.g., what each shape means), and args/kwargs are left entirely generic. The agent has no help understanding how to specify the near-field definition.

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 states the verb 'Insert' and the resource 'near-field definition' clearly. However, it does not distinguish from its sibling tool 'aedt_insert_far_field', which likely has a similar purpose. The mention of 'controlled PyAEDT helper' adds some context but not differentiation.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical scenarios, or conditions under which this tool should be chosen over similar ones like aedt_insert_far_field.

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