crosspad_interface_implementations

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds scoping context (across CrossPad repos) and the return fields, but doesn't detail pagination, ordering, or what happens if no implementations exist. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is acceptable but not rich.

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, zero waste. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then a single actionable usage hint. Every word 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?

Has output schema (covers return shape) and readOnlyHint annotation. The description adds the cross-repo scope and the navigation hint to crosspad_list_interfaces. Complete for a read-oriented lookup tool with good annotation coverage.

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 description coverage is 100% and already documents the pattern requirement ('I[A-Z]' prefix, exact casing). The description reinforces the casing rule with concrete examples (IDisplay, not Display) and warns against incorrect variants, adding value beyond the schema's pattern.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Find all classes implementing a given interface'. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like crosspad_list_interfaces (which lists the interfaces themselves) and crosspad_search_symbols (general symbol search). States return fields: className, file path, platform.

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?

Explicitly recommends using crosspad_list_interfaces first if you don't know exact names, and implies this tool should be used when you do know (or want to discover) implementations of a known interface. Names the alternative tool and the precondition clearly.

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