find_symbol

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a key behavioral trait: results are 'ranked by structural importance', illustrated with the six-run-functions example. It also mentions exactness and the output shape, though it does not discuss limitations like auth or rate limits.

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?

Three sentences with no filler: the main purpose is front-loaded, the ranking behavior is immediately explained, and the alternative tool condition is given once. Every sentence 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?

An output schema exists and the parameter schema is fully documented, so the description need not restate return types or parameter details. It supplies the missing context: when to use, how results are ranked, and when to switch to search_code, making it complete for an AI agent.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds little beyond contextual emphasis on exactness and ranking; it does not deepen meaning for kind, lang, name, or limit beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Locate where a symbol is DEFINED', with concrete outputs (file:line, signature, doc). It also distinguishes from the sibling search_code by positioning itself as the exact lookup for known symbol names, so an agent can tell when to use it.

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 says this is the right first call for 'where is X?' and names the alternative: use search_code when you only know roughly what the thing does. This gives clear selection criteria without the agent needing to infer.

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