sodax_get_solver_intent

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context about the 'includeAll' parameter affecting the result set but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 very concise with two short sentences. The first clearly states the main purpose, and the second gives a specific usage tip. No extraneous content.

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 read tool with three fully described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and key parameter behavior. However, it lacks a note on what 'solver-side details' entails, though the sibling differentiation provides context.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description reiterates the 'includeAll' purpose but adds no new meaning for 'intentHash' or 'format' 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 retrieves solver-side details for an intent including fill history, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('solver-side details for an intent'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like sodax_get_intent which likely returns general intent data.

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 a usage hint for the 'includeAll' parameter but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sodax_get_intent. No when-not or alternative tools are mentioned.

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