Read or set the online solution version

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

The description explicitly states that it mutates a live environment and requires confirm: true to avoid a dry run, which is critical safety information not fully captured in annotations (since none are provided). It also mentions it runs 'pac solution online-version' and uses the active auth profile, adding operational context.

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 front-load the core purpose and mutation warning, followed by a note on which inputs mutate. It is compact, with no filler, and each sentence earns its place.

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?

With 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavioral contract (read vs set, confirmation, dry run). It doesn't explain return values, but since there is no output schema, that might be a gap. However, given the complexity, it is fairly complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 100%, so all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds the distinction that solutionVersion is optional and controls read vs set, but does not add more depth beyond schema. The schema descriptions for confirm and profile already include important context, so baseline 3 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?

The description clearly states the tool reads the solution version without solutionVersion and sets it with solutionVersion, directly distinguishing it from siblings like cs_set_solution_version. The phrase 'Read or set the online solution version' is specific and unambiguous.

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?

It tells the agent when to use the read vs set mode, and mentions the requirement for confirm: true to actually mutate, which is a key usage condition. It doesn't explicitly compare with other version-related tools like cs_set_solution_version, but the read/set distinction is clear enough for most cases.

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