cst_get_solver_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but the verb 'Read' clearly communicates a non-mutating, side-effect-free operation. It does not add details about connection requirements, error behavior, or safety beyond what the verb implies.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter getter.

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 simple nature, zero parameters, and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It could better explain what 'active solver' means or how this relates to set/configure solver tools, but it covers the essential operation.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics because there are none.

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 verb ('Read') and resource ('currently active solver'), making the operation immediately clear. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling mutators like cst_set_solver_tool, though it does not name any alternative explicitly.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cst_set_solver_tool or cst_configure_*_solver_tool. Usage is only implied by the tool name and description.

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