object_resolve

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, error behavior, or what 'resolve' does under the hood. The only behavioral detail is the default model, which is more of a parameter semantic.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence provides a concrete usage example without redundancy. It is efficient for the information it conveys.

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 are covered. However, the description omits the role of context_id, the purpose of npi_type/object_id, and how this tool relates to sibling tools. It covers the main use case but is not complete for the full parameter space.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates partially by explaining the model parameter (default netlist) and the waveform-specific requirements for wave_id and name. However, it leaves npi_type, object_id, and context_id unexplained, so coverage is incomplete.

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 states a specific action: 'Resolve an exact object', which implies a precise lookup rather than a query or traversal. It distinguishes from siblings like object_query or object_traverse by the word 'exact', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with object_get.

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 gives a specific usage pattern ('For waveform signals set model='waveform', wave_id, and name') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like object_query or object_get. It does not mention exclusions or direct comparison to sibling tools.

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