aedt_set_active_project

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Set the active AEDT project,' but does not mention error behavior if project name is invalid, side effects on UI, or whether it returns anything.

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?

Extremely concise (6 words), but at the cost of missing critical guidance. It is front-loaded with the action but lacks structure to support effective use.

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?

Despite low complexity and a single parameter, the description omits return value information. Context signals indicate an output schema exists, but no details are provided, leaving agents uninformed about what the tool returns.

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?

The lone parameter 'project_name' has 0% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning, such as how to obtain valid project names (e.g., via aedt_list_projects) or case sensitivity.

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 'Set the active AEDT project by name,' specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like aedt_set_active_design or aedt_open_project, so it's clear but not maximally distinct.

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 this tool versus alternatives (e.g., aedt_open_project to make a project active). Missing prerequisites like requiring the project to already be opened.

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