doc_hover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It only mentions the PRO+ plan requirement, but does not state that the operation is read-only, what the hover info looks like, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and adds the plan restriction. It is appropriately sized for the minimal content.

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 exists, so the description should clarify what hover info is returned, but it does not. It also does not define 'doc symbol' or provide context on how to use the tool, making it incomplete for an agent to understand its full behavior.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter detail since there are none to document.

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 says the tool provides 'hover info for a doc symbol', which identifies a resource but the phrase 'hover info' is vague and lacks a clear verb. It is somewhat distinct from sibling tools by name, but the description does not specify what the hover info contains or how it is generated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools. The only additional note is 'PRO+ plan', which indicates a plan restriction but does not help an agent decide when this tool is appropriate over alternatives.

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