Retrieve available PyLops solver names, optionally filtered by module or version, to identify solvers for optimization tasks.
List solver names, optionally filtered by module (e.g. "sparsity").
pylops_version selects the PyLops version (e.g. "2.6"); default is the latest.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| module | No | ||
| pylops_version | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses default behavior for pylops_version and implies a read-only listing operation, but does not explicitly describe side effects, matching behavior, or other operational constraints.
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?
Very concise and front-loaded: the primary listing behavior is stated first, followed by the two parameter explanations. No unnecessary text.
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?
For a simple list tool with two optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior, filtering, and version default. Minor gaps remain around valid module names and version semantics.
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%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: module as an optional filter with an example, and pylops_version with an example and the default behavior. It still does not enumerate valid module or version values.
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?
Clearly states the verb and resource: list solver names, with optional module filtering. It is easy to distinguish from get_solver, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from other list_* siblings such as list_proxsolvers.
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?
Explains the optional module filter and the version parameter, but does not state when to use this tool instead of get_solver or other sibling listing tools. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.