aedt_list_api

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It states it lists public methods and attributes, but doesn't specify whether the operation is read-only, what 'public' means, or any side effects. The minimal description leaves the agent uncertain about tool behavior.

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 under-specified. It is not wasteful, yet it lacks structure and could benefit from brevity without sacrificing essential 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 three parameters (especially the target enum with 14 options), the description is too sparse. It does not help the agent understand how to use the tool effectively, nor does it hint at the output structure despite an output schema being present.

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%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters like target, module_name, and include_private. It does not, leaving the agent to guess their meaning from the schema alone.

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 action (list) and the resource (public methods and attributes on a PyAEDT or native AEDT object). It is specific and not a tautology, though it could be more explicit about what each target represents.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor on prerequisites. Among siblings, aedt_list_projects and aedt_list_variations exist, but their purposes differ; however, the description fails to clarify when this tool is appropriate.

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