aedt_list_variations

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

The description implies read-only behavior (listing), which is adequate for a simple retrieval tool. However, it does not confirm lack of side effects or detail about return format, pagination, or limits. With no annotations, more transparency would be beneficial, but the description is functional.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose with zero unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple, and an output schema exists to document return values, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it does not clarify whether both parameters are needed or what happens when they are null, leaving ambiguity about default behavior.

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 coverage is 0%, so parameters 'setup' and 'sweep' have no type descriptions beyond their schema. The description only mentions they are 'for a setup and sweep,' adding minimal meaning. It does not explain their optionality, formats, or effect on results, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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), the resource (variation strings), and the context (for a setup and sweep). It distinguishes from sibling tools like aedt_apply_solved_variation and aedt_get_nominal_variation by focusing on listing, not applying or retrieving a specific value.

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 on when to use or avoid this tool vs alternatives. It does not specify prerequisites or context for using the optional parameters. Implied usage is when needing to enumerate variation strings, but no explicit direction.

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