Plecs Overview

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the call aggregates several data sources into one response, and the cost/efficiency motivation for doing so. It doesn't say whether the briefing is truncated or how large the payload can get, which keeps it below 5.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste, with the payload contents front-loaded before the comparison to alternatives. Nothing is repeated from structured fields.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and the annotation covers the safety profile; the description still gives a useful inventory of what the briefing covers. It stops short of stating scope limits (truncation, which model must be loaded first, whether it works on unloaded models).

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% and the description never mentions model_name, so it adds no semantics beyond the schema. Mitigating factor: there is exactly one required string parameter with a self-evident name, so the risk of misinvocation is low and a mid-range score is appropriate.

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?

States a specific action ('one-call model briefing') plus an enumerated payload: files, state, solver settings, analyses, scopes, outports. It also names the siblings it replaces (statistics, get, getModelTree), so an agent can distinguish it from those without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly frames the usage tradeoff: use this instead of stitching statistics + get + getModelTree together, with 'cheaper' as the selection rationale. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use case (e.g., when you need full detail from get or a deep tree), so it stops short of a 5.

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