cst_configure_multilayer_solver

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It states the tool 'configures' settings but does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, prerequisites (e.g., open project, existing multilayer structure), or whether the configuration is persistent. This is insufficient for a configuration tool.

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 concise at 25 words and efficiently communicates the core purpose. It is front-loaded with key info. However, a bit more structure (e.g., separated usage context) could improve clarity without adding length.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multilayer solver configuration) and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain prerequisites, what configuration is applied, or how to verify the setup. For a configuration tool, more context is needed.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage), including defaults and enumerations. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond listing use cases. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 explicitly states the tool configures the solver for planar multilayer structures, listing specific applications (antenna-on-PCB, FSS, radome) and specifying the frequency domain solver. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like cst_configure_frequency_domain_solver, which is more general.

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 implies usage for planar multilayer structures but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., cst_configure_eigenmode_solver, cst_configure_time_domain_solver). No when-not-to-use or exclusions are stated.

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