document_symbols

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

No annotations exist, so description fills gap. Discloses output is a capped list, cost advantage, and scope behavior. Does not mention error conditions or parameter effects beyond path/scope.

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 efficient sentences. First sentence defines core purpose and output format; second adds usage tip and scope option. No fluff, front-loaded.

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?

With 5 parameters (0 required) and no output schema, description covers core behavior and directory scope. Missing documentation for three less critical parameters, but overall sufficient for typical 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 coverage is 40% (only path and scope have descriptions). Description adds meaning for path and scope (e.g., subtree behavior) but ignores projectPath, backend, and maxResults. Partially compensates but incomplete.

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 explicitly states it outlines a file listing classes/functions/types in a capped 'kind name :line' format. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'read_symbol' by highlighting it's cheaper for structure overview.

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?

Clearly states when to use (cheaper than reading full file) and explains scope='directory' behavior. Lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives but provides clear context.

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