aedt_material_object_summary

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Return') but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, has no side effects, or any other behavioral traits. With no annotations, the description should provide more detail, but it only gives the basic function.

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 with no unnecessary words, making it concise. However, it is too brief and could benefit from a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

With 0% parameter coverage and no usage guidance, the description is incomplete for an agent to understand how to use the tool effectively. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need to explain return values, but the lack of parameter semantics is a significant gap.

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%, meaning the description adds no information about the parameters 'assignment' and 'prop_names'. The description does not explain their formats, allowed values, or how they influence the output. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 it returns conductor/dielectric names and object material properties, indicating a read operation. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like aedt_materials_summary or aedt_modeler_summary, which may also return material or object information.

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, such as aedt_materials_summary for broader material queries or aedt_modeler_summary for object summaries. There is no mention of prerequisites or context where 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.