aedt_post_operation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'allowlisted' but does not explain what that means or what operations are allowed. It also does not disclose side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The abstract parameters (method, args, kwargs) lack behavioral context.

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, concise and front-loaded. It avoids verbosity, but the lack of detail reduces its informativeness. It earns its place but could be expanded slightly.

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 complexity (many siblings, abstract parameters, and existence of an output schema), the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to discover allowed methods, or how it relates to other post-processing tools. The output schema is not shown, but the context indicates it exists; the description ignores this.

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 must compensate. It mentions 'reports, fields, plots, or exports' but does not map these to parameters. The 'method' parameter is required but not explained; 'args' and 'kwargs' are generic. No additional semantic meaning is provided beyond the schema.

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 runs an allowlisted post-processing operation for reports, fields, plots, or exports. It specifies the verb 'run' and the resource 'post-processing operation', and lists the operation types. While it differentiates from many siblings, the term 'allowlisted' is vague and could be clearer.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest any context-specific usage. Siblings like aedt_create_report or aedt_export_field_plot exist, but no differentiation is provided.

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