Extract Function

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds value by mentioning auto-detection of parameters and return type, and the response includes renameFilename/renameLocation for follow-up. This informs the agent about side effects and response structure.

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 concise sentences: first states the primary action, second provides key follow-up information. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 tool with 6 required params and no output schema, the description covers the core action, behavioral notes, and follow-up steps. It could mention that the original code is replaced with a function call, but the destructive hint implies that.

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% with descriptions for all 6 parameters. The description does not add additional semantics beyond what is already in the schema; it only reiterates the purpose in general terms.

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 verb 'Extract' and resource 'selected code range into a new function'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like extractConstant and extractType by specifying 'function'.

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 follow-up guidance to use rename_symbol for naming, which helps the agent understand the workflow. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other extraction tools or indicate when function extraction is preferred over constant/type extraction.

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