decompile_method

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

Describes return format (JSON with path, fqn, code) and mentions decompiling to C#. No annotations provided, so full burden on description. Lacks disclosure of side effects, prerequisites, or error conditions.

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?

Starts with a clear one-line summary, followed by structured argument list and expected return format. Every sentence serves a purpose, no fluff.

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?

Coverage is good: purpose, parameters, return value documented. Could mention potential errors (e.g., invalid path or FQN), but the tool is simple and the description is sufficient for common use.

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 has 0% description coverage, but description fully explains both parameters: 'path' as .NET assembly path, 'fqn' with detailed format and separator rules. Adds meaning well 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'decompile', resource 'single method', and tool used 'ilspycmd'. Distinguishes from sibling 'decompile_type' which targets a whole type.

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?

Provides detailed argument format (especially FQN with '::'), which aids correct invocation. However, no explicit guidance on when to use this vs siblings like 'decompile_type'.

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