trace_calls

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it follows CALLS and CALLS_REMOTE edges and returns an indented call tree with file:line locations. Missing details like performance limits or side effects, but sufficient.

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?

Description is well-structured with bullet points and examples, front-loading core purpose. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value; no wasted 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?

No output schema provided, but description explains return format (indented call tree with locations). Covers main use cases thoroughly for a 4-param tool.

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% and schema already describes parameters well. Description adds context for direction and max_depth implicitly but does not add per-parameter details beyond schema.

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 that the tool traces call chains following CALLS and CALLS_REMOTE edges, distinguishing it from sibling tool `trace_dataflow` which follows data assignments.

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 explicit when-to-use scenarios (forward, backward, both) with examples and clarifies when not to use it by contrasting with `trace_dataflow`.

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