solver_solve_optimization

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It mentions JWT/tenant/company scoping, implying authentication. The action is likely a non-destructive computation, but no explicit statement about side effects, rate limits, or idempotency is provided.

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 well-structured. The key purpose is front-loaded, and the Args section uses clear bullet points. Every sentence adds value without repetition.

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 has an output schema, so return values don't need description. However, the description is sparse on context: it doesn't explain what kind of optimization problems this tool solves, prerequisites, or typical use cases. For a domain agent action, more context would be helpful.

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 the description must compensate. It explains 'message' as free-text objective and 'inputs' as optional JSON string, adding clarity beyond the schema's defaults and types. However, it doesn't describe expected format or examples for the JSON input.

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 it runs the 'solve_optimization' domain agent action. The description specifies the action name and differentiates from siblings like 'solver_chat' or 'solver_constraint_satisfaction' by referencing a specific action. However, it lacks further context on what 'solve_optimization' does.

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. The description only explains routing and authentication, but doesn't mention scenarios where it's appropriate or suggest alternatives for different optimization needs.

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